Search Results for "not entertainable"

198 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 198 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Encroachment Notice Under TNULB Act — Show Cause Notice Not Entertainable Under Article 226. Petitioner Failed to Establish Legal Right; Authorities Directed to Follow Procedure Under Section 128 Before Removal.

The petitioner, Thirumalai, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging a notice dated 19.01.2026 issued by the 4...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court Quashes Human Rights Commission Proceedings in Property Dispute Due to Lack of Jurisdiction. The Commission Exceeded Its Powers Under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 by Intervening in a Private Property Matter with a Pending Civil Suit.

The dispute originated from lands in village Zundal, District Gandhinagar, originally owned by Jethabhai Lallubhai Patel and devolved through inherita...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Petition in Town Planning Matter Due to Prematurity and Lack of Cause of Action. Seeking Mandamus to Forbear Building Permissions Based on Mere Apprehension and Pending Representation Held Not Entertainable Without Infringement of Rights.

The petitioners operated a live stone crusher unit and quarry in Periyappati Village, Namakkal. They apprehended that the respondent authorities might...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Writ Petition of SDPI Against Sealing of Party Offices — Mandamus Issued for Removal of Seals. Political Party's Right to Function Upheld as Sealing Without UAPA Attachment Order is Illegal.

The petitioner, Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI), a political party registered under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, filed a writ p...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Employer's Petition to Quash Industrial Court Order in Closure Dispute. Single Workman Cannot Re-agitate Closure After Majority Settlement and Unconditional Withdrawal of Union Complaint.

The petitioner, a partnership firm, challenged an order of the Industrial Court, Mumbai dated 18/03/1998, which permitted respondent no.1 (a workman) ...