All

Introduction: Farid Pindari and others come with an appeal for a suit of the permanent injunction before the civil court by ignoring sec 85 of the waqf act 1995. As the defendant raise a boundary wall in their portion of land. Facts: A piece of land situated at Mirzaganj, Pargana, and Tehsil Milahabad Lucknow belonged […]

Facts: Submission/Contention Of Appellant: Submission/ contention of respondent: Principles and observation of court: Judgements: Opinion: I agree with the decision of the court for quashing the half-writ petition filed by Mohan Nayak. N, As the accused was found indirectly connected to the commission of an organized crime. The above lines are justified by sec3(2) of

Introduction: The complainant made claim for pensionary benefits by taking into consideration and reckoning the service 10 times rendered by the complainant in the Telecom Department which was served under the Central Government. Facts: Contentions of Appellant: Mr. P. V. Surendranath learned elderly counsel for the complainant made claim for the pensionary benefits by taking

Facts– Contentions of appellant– Contention of the respondent–  Principle an observation of the court– Judgment– The Court observed that the allegations made against respondent no.2 are genuine and there is a clear prime face case against him as alleged by the appellant. Considering the same court found out that observations made by the High Court

Facts – Submission/Contentions of Appellant/s – The Appellant, through their counsel, argued that the decision to set aside the order passed by the Deputy Director by the High Court lacks any legal basis. The notification, dated 11th Oct 1952, vide Section 4 of the Abolition Act, was in force, and as per notification, all estates situated

Introduction: This Judgement clarifies the jurisdiction of the State Investigating Agency to investigate, remand, and commit a case for trial relating to the scheduled offenses under the National Investigation Agency (NIA) Act. Brief Facts of the Case: Contentions of the Appellants: The Appellant claimed that the  State Investigating Agency divested its jurisdiction and breached the

Court Name:  The Supreme Court of  India Judgment Name: Vaishno Devi Constructions v The Union of India Judgment Date: October 21st, 2021 Judges/Bench: J. Sanjay  Kishan Kaul and J. B. R. Gavai. Introduction: The judgment mentioned here is an appeal from the state high court, where the parties have entered into a contract for the

Court Name: The Supreme court of India Judgment Name: Garg Builders v. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Judgment Date: 4th October 2021 Judges/ Bench: J. Abdul Nazeer, J. Krishna Murari. Introduction: Brief Facts of the Case: Contentions of the respondent: The respondent challenged the said award before the Delhi High Court in O.M.P. (COMM.) 28/2017 under

Court: The Supreme court Of India Case: Mohd. Rafiq @ Kallu vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL [APPEAL NO.856 of 2021] Judgment Date – September 15, 2021 Bench: Justices S. Ravindra Bhat and K.M. Joseph Brief facts of the Case – Contentions of the Appellant/s Contentions of the Respondent/s Principles and