ID stringlengths 4 7 | para_id int64 0 26 | newJudgement stringlengths 0 34.1k |
|---|---|---|
id_1697 | 2 | Under Clause 2.1.3, the assignor, namely Yes Bank, is required to execute all documents as may be necessary for the purpose of perfecting the assignee's interest and therefore such a document is essential for any assignment of the pledge as none of the clauses contemplate a direct transfer of the pledged shares. No ass... |
id_1697 | 3 | Andhayarujina supported the submissions of Mr. Seervai that there is no credible explanation on part of the Pledgee for failure to sell the pledged shares immediately. He submitted that Dish TV is a public listed company and its shares are freely traded on the Bombay Stock Exchange and National Stock Exchange. Accordin... |
id_1697 | 4 | Even where the value of the goods deteriorates due to time, no relief can be granted to the pawnor against the pawnee as the pawnor is legally bound to clear the debt and obtain possession of the pawned goods. In this context he has relied upon PTC India (supra) at Paragraph 39, 42 and 62., Mr. Khambata has submitted t... |
id_1697 | 5 | Thus in my prima facie view, the Pledge Deeds in the present case which confer voting rights on the Pledgee beyond what is specified and expressly provided for under Section 176 of the Contract Act cannot be voided as it is permissible for the parties to incorporate into the Pledge Deeds any incident which is not contr... |
id_1697 | 6 | Thus, no case has been made out of there being a fraud as to the character of the contract which would render the document void ab initio. Fraud as to character of the contract are cases where either there is a material alteration to the original contract or signing of the contract by a person believing it to be an ent... |
id_17 | 0 | The Collegium of the Supreme Court of India has recommended the names of seven Additional Judges of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad for appointment as permanent judges in the following terms: Shri Justice Umesh Chandra Sharma, Smt Justice Renu Agarwal, Shri Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, Shri Justice May... |
id_1700 | 0 | Writ Petition (Civil) Numbers 13307 and 13498 of 2021 dated 7 July 2021. Petitioner K. Vijayan, through Advocate, has filed the instant public interest litigation seeking the following reliefs: (i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate order or directions compelling respondents 1 to 3 to issue necessary ord... |
id_1701 | 0 | Reportable Miscellaneous Application No. 665 of 2021 in Special Mention Writ (Civil) No. 3 of 2020. Due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020, the Supreme Court of India took Suo Motu cognizance of the difficulties that might be faced by litigants in filing petitions, applications, suits, appeals and a... |
id_1702 | 0 | Daxay Sachin Sanghavi Petitioner versus the State of Maharashtra and others Respondents. Mr. Yogesh Joshi in behalf of Messrs Y.R.J. Legal for the Petitioner. Mr. Ajay Patil, Advocate on Record for Respondent Number 1 – State. Mr. Pravin Desai, Respondent Number 3, present. Mr. Harshad Joshi for Respondent Number 3., T... |
id_1703 | 0 | Messrs Imperia Structures Ltd. versus Anil Patni, Justice Uday Umesh Lalit. These appeals under Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 are directed against the common judgment and order dated 12 September 2018 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi, in Consumer Case Numbers 30... |
id_1703 | 1 | Notwithstanding anything contained in sub‑section (1), no registration of the real estate project shall be required (a) where the area of land proposed to be developed does not exceed five hundred square metres or the number of apartments proposed to be developed does not exceed eight inclusive of all phases: Provided ... |
id_1703 | 2 | On the strength of the law so declared, Section 79 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act does not in any way bar the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission or Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act to entertain any complaint. The proviso to Section 71(1) of t... |
id_1704 | 0 | Reserved on 07 August 2023 and pronounced on 28 August 2023, CRL.M.A. 48100/2018 (for delay) was filed through advocates K.C. Mittal, Yugansh Mittal and Vaibhav Yadav versus the State represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Manoj Pant and advocates Ajit Kumar, Nutan Kumari, Nikita Sharma and Alok Kumar for responde... |
id_1704 | 1 | It is rooted in the belief that certain behaviors and appearances are deemed appropriate to protect a woman's honor and prevent any potential harm or exploitation. The intent of the legislature is to safeguard a woman's integrity and ensure that she is not subjected to any form of unwarranted or inappropriate behavior ... |
id_1705 | 0 | Bail Application No. 834 of 2023 dated the 24th day of February 2023. This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the petitioner who is arrayed as accused in Crime No. 19 of 2023 of Chalissery Police Station, Palakkad, where he is alleged to have committed o... |
id_1708 | 0 | On 24 November 2022, the Hon'ble Justice G.S. Ahluwalia of the Madhya Pradesh High Court heard a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner seeks: (a) direction to the respondent to initiate departmental action against the culprits of Crime No. 295/2019 and conclude the same with... |
id_1708 | 1 | In Gudalure M.J. Cherian, the Supreme Court of India, in a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India lodged in public interest, after taking note that a charge‑sheet had already been submitted, directed the Central Bureau of Investigation to hold further investigation in respect of the offence involved. In... |
id_1708 | 2 | Arrest is a part of the process of investigation intended to secure several purposes. The accused may have to be questioned in detail regarding various facets of motive, preparation, commission and aftermath of the crime and the connection of other persons, if any, in the crime. In Niranjan Singh v. State of Uttar Prad... |
id_1708 | 3 | Whether lockup was opened or it was closed, it is the case of the prosecution that the lockup was open and the deceased had easy access to the same. However, the said fact does not find corroboration from their own documents. Thus, in the presence of the Head Constable Arun Kumar Mishra, Dharmendra handed over charge o... |
id_1709 | 0 | Reserved on: 8th August, 2023. Pronounced on: 13th September, 2023. Appellant through: Mr. R. K. Bali, Advocate with Ms. Pragya Verma and Ms. Meghna Bali, Advocates, with appellant in person. Versus Respondent through: Mr. Sahil Malik, Advocate with Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Mr. Jitender, Advocates, with respondent in person... |
id_171 | 0 | Date of decision: 12.02.2024 Through: Mr. Pritam Biswas, Advocate versus ORS. Respondents Through: Mr. Shardul Singh, Ms. Devika Mohan, Ms. Ahish Shahpurkar and Ms. Anjali Tiwari, Advocates for R-3 CRL.M.A.4434/2024 (for exemption). Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. W.P.(CRL) 485/... |
id_1710 | 0 | Iqbal Ahmed Kabir Ahmed, Appellant (original accused No.3) vs. State of Maharashtra, Respondent. Mr. Mihir Desai, Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant, Ms. Kritika Agarwal, Mr. Shahid Nadeem, and Mr. Mohd. Shaikh for the appellant. Mrs. A.S. Pai, Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent-NIA. Mr. V.B. Konde-D... |
id_1710 | 1 | We have perused the official translation of the said Vishal Parekar, Petition Application 23/35 form (B/6) (page 79 of the appeal memo) which appears to be a declaration of the acceptance of one Abi Bakr Al Baghdadi Al Hussaini Al Quraishi as the Caliph of the Muslims. The mere possession of such oath form, without sub... |
id_1711 | 0 | Rajya Sabha Secretariat, New Delhi, February 2024 (Magha 1945 Saka). Presented to the Rajya Sabha on 7 February 2024 and laid on the Table of the Lok Sabha on 7 February 2024. Email: rs-cpers@sansad.nic.in. Website: https://sansad.in/rs (Re‑constituted with effect from 13 September 2023)., Members: Shri Sushil Kumar Mo... |
id_1711 | 1 | Thus it can be seen that as far as the disposal of cases is concerned, the performance of our Supreme Court is quite good. The problem lies with the legacy arrears of about 35,000. From the foregoing discussion it can be seen that vacations in the judiciary are not the only factor for pendency. For reducing pendency th... |
id_1712 | 0 | IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI\n\nI.A. 7944/2021 in CS(OS) 300/2021\n\nLAKSHMI MURDESHWAR PURI, Plaintiff, Through: Mr. Maninder Singh, Senior Advocate with Ms. Meghna Mishra, Mr. Dheeraj P. Deo, Mr. Tarun Sharma and Mr. Prabhas Bajaj, Advocates versus SAKET GOKHALE, Defendant, Through: Mr. Sarim Naved, Advoca... |
id_1712 | 1 | The defendant is restrained, pending further orders of the High Court, from posting any defamatory, scandalous or factually incorrect tweet on his Twitter account against the plaintiff or her husband. In the event of the defendant failing to comply with the direction within 24 hours of the pronouncement of this order, ... |
id_1713 | 0 | Order Sheet CRMP No. 1189 of 2020 Mohammed Zubair versus State of Chhattisgarh. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal. 05 October 2020. Proceedings of this matter have been taken up through video conferencing. Mr. Colin Gonsalves, learned Senior Advocate, and Mr. Kishore Narayan, counsel for the petitioner, appeared. ... |
id_1714 | 0 | Petitioner: Sudhir Kumar. Respondent: Union of India and four others. Counsel for petitioner: Krishna Mohan Tripathi, Honourable Ashwani Kumar Mishra, Judge, Honourable Ashutosh Srivastava, Judge. Heard Shri P. K. Singh and Shri Krishna Mohan Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Gaurav Kumar Chand appeari... |
id_1717 | 0 | Balmiki Prasad Chourasia, son of Late Baldeo Prasad Chourasia, resident of Village Jhikatia, Police Station Maheshkhut, District Khagaria, is the appellant. The respondent is the State of Bihar. Appearance for the appellant: Mister Amish Kumar, Amicus Curiae. Appearance for the State: Mister Ajay Mishra, Additional Pub... |
id_1719 | 0 | Date of decision: 13th September 2023. Appellant through: Ms. Anu Narula, Advocate with appellant in person. Versus Respondent through: Mr. Arvind Chaudhary, Advocate for Late Smt. Rajwanti Malik., An appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 has been filed on behalf of the appellant wife against the judgm... |
id_1719 | 1 | Nothing more can be painful than experiencing one's own flesh and blood, that is, the child, rejecting him or her. Such wilful alienation of the child amounts to mental cruelty. In the present case, the child has not only been totally alienated, but has also been used as a weapon against the father. Nothing can be more... |
id_1720 | 0 | Petitioner: Sanjay Goel and another. Respondent: State of Uttar Pradesh and two others. Counsel for the petitioner: Swetashwa Agarwal, Dinkar Lal. Counsel for the respondents: Government Advocate Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, Judge Subhash Vidyarthi. Heard Shri Swetashwa Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioners., The re... |
id_1723 | 0 | Pradeep Rameshwar Sharma, Age: 59, Occupation: Retired, Plot No. 601, Bhagwan Bhavan, JB Nagar, Andheri (East), Mumbai 400059, Appellant/Accused No. 10 versus National Investigating Agency, 7th Floor, MTNL, Telephone Exchange Building, Pedder Road, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai 400026; and the State of Maharashtra, Respondents... |
id_1723 | 1 | Admittedly, none of these witnesses were present in the meeting nor are they alleged to have heard the conversation between Sachin Waze and the Ex-Home Minister. Prima facie, the meeting with the Ex-Home Minister cannot be said to be unusual, as Sachin Waze was the Investigating Officer of an important case at the rele... |
id_1724 | 0 | Through: Mr. J.K. Gupta, Advocate versus Through: Ms. Aditi Saraswat, Advocate for Mr. Jawahar Raja, Additional Standing Counsel (Civil) Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi for Respondents 1 to 3. Mr. Akhil Mittal, Standing Counsel for Mr. Vivek Kumar, Advocate for East Delhi Municipal Corporation., This ... |
id_1725 | 0 | Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? To be referred to the reporter or not? Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment? Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any order made thereunder? Ver... |
id_1725 | 1 | That there are no rules under Section 33 of the Gujarat Police Act and therefore no information can be so provided as the rejection was under another provision seems to be a misconceived proposition of the State. Decisions cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the case of Himmat Lal K Shah (supra) and in t... |
id_1726 | 0 | Leave granted. A disquieting trend emerging over the years which has gained pace in recent times necessitates this opinion. It has been found by us in multiple cases in the past several months that upon First Information Reports being lodged inter alia under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (the IPC, hereafte... |
id_1727 | 0 | Through: Dayan Krishnan, Senior Advocate with Pravin Anand, Ameet Naik, Vaishali Mittal, Madhu Gadodia, Siddhant Chamola, Shivang Sharma, Hersh Desai, Pallavi Bhatnagar, Megha Chandra, Harsh Jha, Sujoy Mukherjee and Tarini Kulkarni, Advocates. Versus Through: Mamta Rani Jha, Shruttima Ehersa and Rohan Ahuja, Advocates ... |
id_1730 | 0 | IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\nMISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. ___ OF 2019 (For Contempt)\nIN WRIT PETITION (PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) NO. 170 OF 2017\nMustak Hussain, Mehndi Hussain Kadri, Applicants\nVersus\nDr. Jagadip Narayan Singh, Indian Administrative Service and Another, Opponents., By way of ... |
id_1730 | 1 | Shri Kamal B. Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate, has appeared with Shri Satyam Y. Chhaya, learned advocate for the respondent Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and Mrs. Manisha Lavkumar, learned Government Pleader, who has appeared on behalf of the respondent State and the Home Department as well as the Traffic Department... |
id_1730 | 2 | That thereafter, the Division Bench in Sharda Sahkari Gruh Mandali Limited and Others v. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and Others (supra) issued various directions in detail, which are as follows:, The local authorities, such as Municipal corporations, municipalities, Panchayats and Development Authorities, shall reg... |
id_1730 | 3 | It is submitted that the above referred decision would result into deterrent effect against the owner of stray cattle and then they would not indulge into activity of keeping their cattle on road. Shri Kamal Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation has further submitted an... |
id_1730 | 4 | Over and above the above directions, it is further directed that the Commissioner, Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, Ahmedabad shall see to it that the quality of roads is maintained and that payment to the contractors is made only after considering the measurement books and the directions issued hereinabove. Considerin... |
id_1730 | 5 | Parking Policy for Surat City shows that parking lines up on most of the corridors, creating congestion, chaos and pollution, which impacts the mobility and livability in the city and saturates the central area. Double‑lined parking along the streets is a common sight with clogged up unorganized parking at intersection... |
id_1730 | 6 | A draft parking policy for Surat proposes a sustainable parking management system. Parking facilities may be required for business users and entertainment venues and should be regulated by time restrictions or by preventing or discouraging parking of vehicles owned by owners and employees of establishments such as shor... |
id_1730 | 7 | The Surat Municipal Corporation (SMC) shall issue a residential parking permit in the following cases: the applicant's residence is situated in a section of the road where parking is regulated by time and price; the applicant's residence does not have access to adequate off‑street parking facilities; the applicant's re... |
id_1731 | 0 | Government of India Ministry of Law and Justice Department of Justice (Appointments Division) Jaisalmer House, 26, Man Singh Road, New Delhi-110011. Dated: 1st November 2023. In exercise of the power conferred by Article 223 of the Constitution of India, the President is pleased to appoint Shri Justice Hamarsan Singh T... |
id_1732 | 0 | Criminal Original Petition Nos. 20088, 2013-5 & 20406 of 2022. Petitioners: Kiruthika Jayaraj, L. Haripriya (in Criminal Original Petition No. 20088 of 2022); E. C. Ravikumar, R. S. Shanthi (in Criminal Original Petition No. 20135 of 2022); Sivasankaran (in Criminal Original Petition No. 20406 of 2022). Respondents: St... |
id_1733 | 0 | Bombay Lawyers Association, a body registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, having its office at 4th Floor, Onlooker Building, Sir P.M. Road, Fort, Mumbai 400001, through its President Advocate Ahmad M. Abdi, email abdiandco@gmail.com, telephone 9820073915, is the petitioner. The respondents are: Jagdeep ... |
id_1734 | 0 | Reserved on 09.12.2022 Date of Decision: 19.12.2022 Sandeep Tomar No. SS433024A Appellant versus State of Punjab Respondent. Present: Mr. Suvir Sidhu, Advocate, Mr. G. S. Badal, Advocate, and Mr. G. S. Dhillon, Advocate, for the appellant; Mr. J. S. Mehndiratta, Additional Advocate General, Punjab; Mr. Sumeet Goel, Sen... |
id_1735 | 0 | Versus Appearance: Suo Motu for the Petitioner(s) Number 1 Mister HS Munshaw (495) for the Respondent(s) Number 10, 11, 12, 13 Mister Pranav G. Desai (290) for the Respondent(s) Number 7, 9. Notice served for the Respondent(s) Number 14 and Date: 06/02/2024., By order dated 15.12.2022, taking note of the directions con... |
id_1736 | 0 | Miss Gouri Abhay Bhide, age 38 years, C/o Shrinath, Apartment 306, Veer Savarkar Marg, Dadar, Mumbai 400028. Abhay Bhide, age 73 years, C/o Shrinath, Apartment 306, Veer Savarkar Marg, Dadar, Mumbai 400028. Petitioners versus Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs and Secretary, Ministry of Finance;... |
id_1736 | 1 | On a reading of the complaint and the petition, it appears that the Petitioners are only speculating on the sudden rise in the prosperity index of the private Respondents from their humble beginning and, therefore, entertain a suspicion that the lifestyle maintained by the said private Respondents could only be attribu... |
id_1738 | 0 | Date of decision: 7 October 2020. Through: Petitioner in person versus Through: Mr. Rajiv Nayyar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Satyakam, Assistant Solicitor Counsel for Mr. Kailash Vasdev and Mr. Ramesh Gupta Khanna, Senior Advocates with Mr. Amit P. Shahi and Mr. Yugansh Mittal, Advocates for Bar Council of Delhi along wi... |
id_1740 | 0 | Criminal Law Petition 185 of 2018 and Criminal Law Petition 257 of 2018 were reserved on 22 September 2020 and pronounced on 29 September 2020. The applications were filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Directorate of Enforcement. The petitioners were represented by Mr. Sanjay Jain, Additional Solicitor... |
id_1740 | 1 | It is good on the part of the learned counsels for the respondents to apprise the Supreme Court of India that how it should proceed with the cases pending in the court but let the learned counsels be also reminded of the fact that they being the officers of this Court should assist in part‑heard cases so that these are... |
id_1743 | 0 | The complainant, a Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone IX, Mumbai, residing at Dy. Comm. of Police Zone IX Office, Hill Road, Bandra West, Mumbai 400050, files this complaint through the Public Prosecutor. The complainant is an Indian inhabitant and a 2007-batch officer of the Indian Police Service, currently serving a... |
id_1743 | 1 | The Honourable Court possesses the territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try the instant complaint as the complainant was defamed and continues to be defamed in Mumbai. The complainant resides and is posted in Mumbai and has his office at the address as mentioned in the cause title. He came across the circulation a... |
id_1746 | 0 | Reserved on: 24.02.2022 Pronounced on: 02.03.2022 Versus Argued by: Mr. U.K. Agnihotri, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana., The challenge in the instant revision petition is to the judgment dated 02.12.2021 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions J... |
id_1746 | 1 | He has also given a detailed description of the circumstances that preceded the occurrence and also the subsequent developments. Reliability and admissibility of the statement of the said witness cannot be discredited merely for want of corroboration through medical evidence especially when the charge is of a non‑penet... |
id_1747 | 0 | Advocate for the petitioner: Mr. N. D. Batule. Advocate for the respondent: Mr. D. R. Marked as having father Mr. G. P. Darandale. By this writ petition the petitioner, a father, intends to invoke the constitutional powers of this Court under Article 226 and Article 227 of the Constitution of India to challenge the ord... |
id_1749 | 0 | Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 2113 of 2018\nNishikant Dubey (Member of Parliament) Petitioner\nVersus\nState of Jharkhand Opposite Party\nFor the Petitioner: Mister Prashant Pallava, Advocate; Mister Parth Jalan, Advocate\nFor the Respondent State: Mister Pankaj Kumar, Public Prosecutor\nHeard on 16 September 202... |
id_1749 | 1 | The judgment relied upon by Mr. Pankaj Kumar, the learned counsel for the State in the case of Radhe Shyam Makharia and Others v. State of Bihar and Others (supra), wherein the Hon'ble Patna High Court has struck down section 353 of the Indian Penal Code as far as that case is concerned, considering that no ingredient ... |
id_175 | 0 | W.P.(C) No. 12508 of 2021 (S) Dated the 22nd day of June, 2021 S. Manikumar, Chief Justice Seeking to quash Exhibit-P2, order dated 21.05.2021 issued by the Director, Department of Animal Husbandry, Lakshadweep Administration, Lakshadweep, respondent No.4, and Exhibit-P4, minutes of the meeting of Union Territory Level... |
id_1750 | 0 | Miscellaneous Application No. 665/2021 in SMW(C) No. 3/2020 Respondent(s) Date: 27-04-2021. This application was called on for hearing today., For the parties: Applicant Mr. Shivaji M. Jadhav, Advocate; Mr. Manoj K. Mishra, Advocate; Dr. Joseph S. Aristotle, Advocate; Ms. Diksha Rai, Advocate; Mr. Nikhil Jain, Advocate... |
id_1751 | 0 | Kunal Kamra versus Union of India and Connected Matters. Shephali Kunal Kamra, Indian inhabitant, aged 34 years, residing at C‑33, Kataria Colony, Cadel Road, Mahim, Mumbai 400016. Petitioner versus Union of India, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, having its office at El... |
id_1751 | 1 | Other definitions in Section 2 of the Information Technology Act are more than somewhat confusing and intertwined. ‘Data’ means a representation of information, knowledge, facts, concepts or instructions which are being prepared or have been prepared in a formalised manner, and is intended to be processed, is being pro... |
id_1751 | 2 | The Grievance Appellate Committee shall adopt an online dispute resolution mechanism wherein the entire appeal process, from filing of appeal to the decision thereof, shall be conducted through digital mode., We are not concerned with the rest of Rule 3 or with Rules 4A to 4C. Then come Rules 5 and 6 and, importantly, ... |
id_1751 | 3 | In other words, if a Creator or Sender knowingly and intentionally displays, uploads, publishes, transmits, stores or shares any information or content which is misleading or is patently false and untrue, the Recipient who is misled by it or defamed by it or harmed by it in any manner can take recourse to the Grievance... |
id_1751 | 4 | [(1971) 403 United States 713 : 29 L Ed 2d 822 (1971)], popularly known as the Pentagon Papers case, any system of prior restraints of freedom of expression comes to the Supreme Court of India bearing a heavy presumption against its constitutional validity and, in such cases, the Government carries a heavy burden of sh... |
id_1751 | 5 | A certain section of a particular community may be grossly offended or annoyed by communications over the internet that promote liberal views such as the emancipation of women, the abolition of the caste system, or whether members of a non‑proselytizing religion should be allowed to bring persons within their fold who ... |
id_1751 | 6 | We are concerned with the interpretation of a particular Rule. The Petitioners' argument is founded on the premise that all users everywhere and in all circumstances have the plenitude of choice. In reality, our choices are constrained by innumerable factors. The argument comes perilously close to saying that no law th... |
id_1751 | 7 | Supplementing Mister Seervai's argument, but with a focus on Article 19(1)(g) and Article 19(6), Mister Farasat opens with one incisive point. The test, he submits, and I think with considerable justification, is to see if this Rule could be applied to print media as it stands., Mister Farasat is quick to point out tha... |
id_1751 | 8 | Not only do they have their own fact‑checking systems, but they and their individual writers publish in print and online. The decisive test must surely be that if the material in print cannot be subjected to Fact‑Checking Unit checking and compelled deletion, there is no reason why, merely because the exact same materi... |
id_1753 | 0 | Petitioner: U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board. Respondent: Ancient Idol of Swayambhu Lord Vishweshwar and five others. Counsel for Petitioner: Punit Kumar Gupta. Counsel for Respondent: Ajay Kumar Singh, Ashish Kumar Singh, Hare Ram, Manoj Kumar Singh, Tejas Singh, Vineet Pandey, Vineet Sankalp. Petitioner: Anjuman Intazam... |
id_1753 | 1 | The long title evinces the intent of Parliament in enacting the law, for it is: An Act to prohibit conversion of any place of worship and to provide for the maintenance of the religious character of any place of worship as it existed on the 15th day of August, 1947, and for matters connected therewith or incidental the... |
id_1753 | 2 | While the Courts have to see only religious character of a place of worship leaving aside the design, shape or style of its structure. It was next contended that Section 4(1) and 4(2) of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 applies only in case of undisputed structure and not in case of disputed structu... |
id_1753 | 3 | While Sub‑Section (c) defines place of worship as a temple, mosque, gurudwara, church, monastery or any other place of public religious worship of any religious denomination or any section thereof, Section 3 places an embargo upon the conversion of place of worship and mentions that no person shall convert any place of... |
id_1753 | 4 | An Ordinance promulgated by the Governor of a Province under section 88 of the Government of India Act, 1935, and in force immediately before the commencement of this Constitution shall, unless withdrawn by the Governor of the corresponding State earlier, cease to operate at the expiration of six weeks from the first m... |
id_1754 | 0 | Doctor P. Varavara Rao, aged 83 years, Indian inhabitant, having address at 419, Himasai Heights, Lane No. 6, Jawahar Nagar, Secunderabad and at present residing at Retreat House, Room No. 17, 6, Kane Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra 400050. Vernon Stanislaus Gonsalves, aged 64 years, Indian inhabitant, having ... |
id_1755 | 0 | Mister Kanta Ramchandra Rane, Director of Kaalkaa Real Estates Private Limited, having its registered office at Khar Sant Niwas CHS Ltd., 2nd Floor, Plot No. 3, 14th Road, Khar West, Mumbai 400052, is a petitioner. The other petitioner is Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, located at 5 Mahapalika Marg, Dhobi Tala... |
id_1755 | 1 | We have perused the pleadings filed by the petitioners in this writ petition and the order passed by the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. 3116 of 2022. When the first application for retention was made by the petitioners, the provisions of Development Control and Promotion Regulation 2034 were already brought in ... |
id_1755 | 2 | Judicial discretion cannot be guided by expediency. Courts are not free from statutory fetters. Justice is to be rendered in accordance with law. Judges are not entitled to exercise discretion wearing the robes of judicial discretion and pass orders based solely on their personal predilections and peculiar dispositions... |
id_1755 | 3 | We are not impressed with the arguments of Mr. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, that unauthorized construction carried out by his client is being used for residential purposes, and no prejudice would be caused to the Municipal Corporation or the members of the public at large if the application for retention... |
id_1756 | 0 | Date of decision: 28th November 2023. Plaintiff: Trading Corporation of Pakistan Private Limited, Rice Exporters Association of Pakistan, and Basmati Growers Association (hereinafter the Plaintants). Defendant: Government of India represented by Mr. Akshay Amritanshu, Mr. Rajendra Kumar, Mr. Jitin George, Mr. Ashutosh ... |
id_1757 | 0 | Petitioner: Smt. Saloni Yadav and another. Respondent: State of Uttar Pradesh and three others. Counsel for petitioner: Mr. Mohd. Monis. Counsel for respondents: G. A., Amar Bahadur Maurya, Arvind Singh, Deepak Dubey, Dharmendra Kumar Mishra, Maan Singh, Manoj Kumar Kushwaha, Sunil Kumar Kushwaha, Hon'ble Justice Vivek... |
id_1758 | 0 | A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J. The facts of the instant case bring to the fore a classic instance of how a litigant, with the help of clever lawyers, can successfully tweak the law and the legal system in her favour, and avoid transfers and postings that form an integral part of her conditions of service. The appellant ... |
id_1759 | 0 | Applicant: Smriti Singh alias Mausami Singh and three others. Opposite Party: State of Uttar Pradesh and another. Counsel for Applicant: Shri Prakash Dwivedi and Saurabh Sachan. Counsel for Opposite Party: Additional Government Advocate Ajatshatru Pandey and Honourable Sanjay Kumar Singh. Heard: Mr. Saurabh Sachan, lea... |
id_1762 | 0 | Ilavarasan, Petitioner, versus The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram; The Inspector of Police, Thirupalaikudi Police Station, Ramanathapuram District; Maheswaran; and Vijayan, Respondents. PRAYER: Habeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,... |
id_1763 | 0 | Date of Decision: 07.11.2023 Petitioner through: Mister Prateek Kumar, Advocate Versus Respondent through: None for respondent Number 1 Miss Prerna Mehta and Mister Rajeev M. Roy, Advocates for respondent Number 2 Mister Abhishek Nanda and Miss Parul Tomer, Advocates for respondent Number 3, The petitioners in the inst... |
id_1764 | 0 | PCR No. 3686/2023 dated 13 June 2023. Present: Special Court for trial of cases filed against sitting as well as former MPs/MLAs, triable by Magistrate in the State of Karnataka. Complainant 1: Shankar Shet, son of Suresh, 41 years, residing at No. 66, Shivpura Colony, Gokul Road, Hubli, Dharwad, Karnataka 580030. Comp... |
id_1765 | 0 | ABC v State of Maharashtra Ashwini [Age and address withheld for privacy] Petitioner versus State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Public Health Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 400023. Respondent for the petitioner Ms Aditi Saxena, with Rachita Padwal. Respondent state Mr V M Mali, Additional Government Plea... |
id_1765 | 1 | Accepting the Medical Board's view is therefore not just to condemn the fetus to a substandard life but is to force on the petitioner and her husband an unhappy and traumatic parenthood. The effect on them and their family cannot even be imagined., Miss Saxena is appropriately restrained in what she says. But there is ... |
id_1767 | 0 | Judgment reserved on 10 October 2022; judgment delivered on 12 October 2022. Through: Mr. N. Hariharan, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Bharat Chugh, Mr. Siddharth Shiva Kumar, Mr. Siddarth S. Yadav, Mr. Varun Deswal, Ms. Punya Rekha Angara, Mr. Prateek Bhalla, Mr. Sharian Mukherji, Mr. Rahul, Mr. Kaushal Kaushik and Mr. Ada... |
id_1768 | 0 | Appellant versus the State of Maharashtra and another Respondents: Mr. Murtaza Najmi with Mrs. Farida Murtaza Najmi, Ms. Davinder Sabharwal, Ms. Siddhi Ghogale, Ms. Sulbha Chakranarayan and Ms. Aqsa Tajuddin for the Appellant. Mr. S. R. Agarkar, A. P. P. for the State. Ms. Sonali Sable with Mr. Macchindra Bodke for Res... |
id_1768 | 1 | Only when both aspects of an adolescent's rights are recognized can human sexual dignity be considered fully respected. Development of sexuality starts as early as intrauterine life following conception and continues through infancy, childhood, adolescence, adulthood and till death. Self‑awareness about sexuality evolv... |
id_177 | 0 | Daily Order Consumer Complaint No. CC/270/2023 dated 2 February 2024. Date of Institution: 25 May 2023. Date of Decision: 2 February 2024., Complainants: 1. Rajesh Chopra, son of Sh. S.K. Chpora, residing at House No. 1006, Sector 43 B, Chandigarh. 2. Gamini Chpora, wife of Rajesh Chopra, residing at the same address. ... |
id_1770 | 0 | Supplementary gd/ssd/cm/ Debajyoti /Kole/ Tanmoy (Through Video Conference) Writ Petition (Arbitration) 10504 of 2021 Shri Firhad Hakim @ Bobby Hakim & Ors. Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General of India; Mr. Y.J. Dastoor, Additional Solicitor General of India; Mr. Samrat Goswami, Advocate for the petitioner and Applican... |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.