Odisha Administrative Tribunal (OAT) – The abolition of the OAT is not violative of the fundamental right of access to justice because the Orissa High Court will hear cases which were pending before the OAT prior to its abolition
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ORISSA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BAR ASSOCIATION — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI. and…
Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947 – Section 13(1)(e) and 15(1) – Unless the contract itself permits subletting, it shall not be lawful, after coming into operation of the Act of 1947, for a tenant to sublet the premises let out to him or to assign or transfer in any manner his interest therein with an exception the State Government may permit so by gazette notification.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH YUVRAJ @ MUNNA PRALHAD JAGDALE AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. JANARDAN SUBAJIRAO WIDE — Respondent ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and Sanjay Kumar, JJ.…
(IPC) – Section 304(ii) – Culpable homicide not amounting to murder – Quantum of sentence – Court is of the opinion that the interest of justice would be met if the sentence imposed on the appellant-accused is reduced to the extent of 05 years in place of 07 years
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PANNEER SELVAM — Appellant Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Bela M. Trivedi, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…
(IPC) – Sections 366, 342 and 506 – Kidnapping for purpose of marriage – Acquittal – Conviction solely on the basis of the statement of victim not sufficient to prove the guilty – Conviction and sentence is set aside – Appeal allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH K.H. BALAKRISHNA — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA — Respondent ( Before : V. Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…
Central Excise Act, 1944 – Section 4(A) – Mere affixation of MRP does not make goods eligible to find refuge under Section 4(A) of the Act, and what is required along with such affixation is a mandate of law that directs the seller to affix such MRP.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & SERVICE TAX, KANPUR — Appellant Vs. M/S. A.R. POLYMERS PRIVATE LIMITED ETC. — Respondent ( Before : Krishna Murari…
Remarks passed in court – it is essential for the courts to be extremely cautious while passing adverse remarks against the parties involved, and must do so with proper justification, in the right forum, and only if it is necessary to meet the ends of justice.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SEEMANT KUMAR SINGH — Appellant Vs. MAHESH PS AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Krishna Murari and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…
Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 – there is no per se restriction on the exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution by the High Court – Union of India & Ors. v. Major General Shri Kant Sharma & Anr., (2015) 6 SCC 773does not lay down the correct law
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. PARASHOTAM DASS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Abhay S. Oka and B.V. Nagarathna,…
It is well settled that even if the decision on a question of law has been reversed or modified by subsequent decision of a superior court in any other case it shall not be a ground for review of such judgment merely because a subsequent judgment of the Single Judge has taken contrary view.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHRAMJEEVI COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. DINESH JOSHI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Datta, JJ.…
Anticipatory Bail in CBI case HELD When the primary focus is on documentary evidence, court fail to understand as to why the appellants should now be arrested – CBI did not require the custodial interrogation of the appellants during the period of investigation from 29.06.2019 till 31.12.2021 Bail granted
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MAHDOOM BAVA — Appellant Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION — Respondent ( Before : V. Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No……..…
HELD the question stock broker not only has to obtain a certificate of registration from SEBI for each of the stock exchange where he operates, at the same time, has to pay ad valorem fee prescribed no more res integra in view of Securities and Exchange Board of India Vs. National Stock Exchange Members Association and Another 2022 SCCOnline SC 1392
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GPSK CAPITAL PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MANTRI FINANCE LIMITED) — Appellant Vs. THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA — Respondent ( Before…








