Delhi Judicial Service Rules 1970 – Rule 14(c) – HELD permit the High Court as a one-time measure to allow those candidates who were within the age cut-off of 45 years during the recruitment years 2020 and 2021 to participate in the ensuing DHJS examinations – the last date for the receipt of applications shall stand extended to 26 March 2022 while the examination shall be held on 3 April 2022, in those terms
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH HIGH COURT OF DELHI — Appellant Vs. DEVINA SHARMA — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, A S Bopanna and Hima Kohli,…
(CPC) – Order 7 Rule 11 – Rejection of plaint – plaintiffs claimed the relief in the suit invoking Section 53A of the TP Act – Only in a case where on the face of it, it is seen that the suit is barred by limitation, then and then only a plaint can be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC on the ground of limitation.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SRI BISWANATH BANIK AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. SMT. SULANGA BOSE AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ.…
HELD When bail has been granted to an accused, the State may, if new circumstances have arisen following the grant of such bail, approach the High Court seeking cancellation of bail under section 439 (2) of the CrPC – OR the State may prefer an appeal against the order granting bail, on the ground that the same is perverse or illegal or has been arrived at by ignoring material aspects which establish a prima facie case against the accused.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KAMLA DEVI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…
Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923 – Section 4A(3) – HELD Therefore, on the death of the employee/deceased immediately, the amount of compensation can be said to be falling due. Therefore, the liability to pay the compensation would arise immediately on the death of the deceased.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHOBHA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE CHAIRMAN, VITHALRAO SHINDE SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and…
State while formulating a policy for its own employees has to give due consideration to the importance of protecting family life as an element of the dignity of the person and a postulate of privacy.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SK NAUSAD RAHAMAN AND OTHERTS — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and Vikram…
Mesne profits – Reduction – If the valuer’s report was for commercial use/commercial property, the mesne profits could not have been reduced by 50%.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANAR DEVI (D) THROUGH LR. — Appellant Vs. VASUDEV MANGAL ETC. ETC. — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. )…
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Order 41 Rule 27 – Production of additional evidence – – HELD true test, therefore is, whether the appellate court is able to pronounce judgment on the materials before it without taking into consideration the additional evidence sought to be adduced.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANJAY KUMAR SINGH — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…
Contempt is a matter which is between the Court passing the order of which contempt is alleged and the contemnor; questions as to executability of such order is a question which concerns the parties inter-se – Power of the Court to invoke contempt jurisdiction, is not, in any way, altered
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE REAL ESTATE FUND — Appellant Vs. DHARMESH S. JAIN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ.…
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Sections 4 and 18 – Determination of compensation – HELD High Court has mechanically held that the claimants shall be entitled to the compensation considering the price/sale consideration mentioned in the Sale Deed – Impugned orders passed by High Court are hereby quashed
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRAMINA DEVI (DEAD) THR. LRS. — Appellant Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Civil…
Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 243Q(2) – Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 – Section 5 – Public notification – Declaration of Gram Panchayat as a Municipal Board – HELD State Government had exercised powers to establish Municipality in terms of Section 5 of the Municipalities Act – Order of High Court is clearly erroneous and unsustainable in law – Appeal allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF RAJASTHAN — Appellant Vs. ASHOK KHETOLIYA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…