Search Results for "directory not mandatory"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensat...
Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Sui...
Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Compulsory Retirement Case Based on Declining ...
Supreme Court Upholds High Court's Determination that Non-Signatory to MoS Not B...

Search Results for "directory not mandatory"

711 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 711 result(s)

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeals Against De-Freezing of Bank Accounts in Seizure Case Under Section 102(3) CrPC — Delayed Reporting to Magistrate Does Not Vitiate Seizure Order; Requirement is Directory, Not Mandatory.

13 May 2024

The Supreme Court considered appeals by the first informant in Crime No.318 of 2022 against an order of the Madras High Court dated 09.08.2023, which ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Holds Amendment to Section 202 CrPC Mandatory for Accused Residing Outside Jurisdiction — Larger Bench Resolves Conflict in Favor of Mandatory Inquiry Before Issuance of Process. The provision requiring inquiry before process when accused resides outside jurisdiction is mandatory, as held by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Re: Expeditious Trial of Cases under Section 138 of N.I. Act, 1881.

16 Jan 2024

The case involves a reference to a larger Bench of the Bombay High Court to resolve a cleavage of opinion on whether the amendment to Section 202(1) o...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Petitions Challenging No-Confidence Motion Against Sarpanch and Upa-Sarpanch for Non-Compliance with Mandatory Procedure Under Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959. Failure to Move Resolution in Special Meeting Renders Motion Invalid and Attracts Bar Under Section 35(3-A) Against Fresh Motion for One Year.

9 Nov 2023

The petitioners, Savita Shrimant Ghule (Sarpanch) and Ganesh Vishnu Hagawne (Upa-Sarpanch) of Grampanchayat Ukkadgaon, Taluka Barshi, District Solapur...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revision Against Rejection of Plaint in Summary Suit for Recovery of Money. Order 6 Rule 2(3) CPC does not require dates and sums in figures and words in plaint, and Order 37 Rule 2 CPC does not mandate separate verification.

19 Apr 2023

The present Civil Revision Application was filed by the applicants (original defendants) against the order dated 07/11/2022 passed by the 14th Joint C...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition, Sets Aside Rejection of Delay Condonation in Filing Written Statement — Emphasizes Liberal Approach to Condonation of Delay to Advance Substantial Justice. The court condoned a delay of 31 months and 16 days in filing the written statement, holding that technicalities should not defeat substantial justice.

27 Jan 2023

The present Writ Petition was filed by the Original Defendants (Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. and Citi Corp. Finance India Ltd.) challenging the ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Upholds Compensation Over Reinstatement for Teacher in Illegal Termination Case. Appointment Without Approval Renders Reinstatement Inappropriate; Section 11(2)(e) of MEPS Act Applied for Six Months' Salary Compensation.

2 Dec 2022

The petitioner, Shri Charudatta Ramchandra Bagadi, was employed as a teacher at Bramhaling Vidyalaya Hajgoli, a school run by Respondent No.1 (Shetkar...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Remands Oppression Petition in Share Allotment Dispute Under Sections 397/398 of Companies Act, 1956 — Preference Shareholder's Voting Rights and Validity of Allotments Require Reconsideration. The Court held that the allotments were made in compliance with Section 81(1A) but the High Court failed to properly assess the allegations of oppression, necessitating a fresh hearing by the Company Law Board.

10 May 2019

The appeal arose from a judgment of the Delhi High Court which set aside an order of the Company Law Board (CLB) in a petition under Sections 397 and ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Arbitration Appeal Against Dismissal of Section 34 Application for Non-Compliance with Section 34(5) — Substantial Compliance Sufficient. The court held that the requirement of prior notice and affidavit under Section 34(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is procedural and not mandatory, and substantial compliance is sufficient when the other party had actual notice.

23 Mar 2018

The Appellant, Vikramsinha Laxmansinha Jadhavrao, filed an Arbitration Appeal under Section 37(1)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, ch...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal in Municipal Election Dispute — Sets Aside Dismissal of Election Petition for Non-Prosecution. Restoration of Election Petition Granted as Tribunal Failed to Consider Sufficient Cause for Absence Under Section 151 CPC.

10 Mar 2015

The appellant, Mr. K. Krishnaraj Hegde, filed an election petition under Section 21 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation (Election) Act 1979 before ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Considers Legality of Land Acquisition for Jaipur Metro Rail Phase II, Focusing on Compliance with Section 5A Hearing. The Court Examined Whether Denial of Personal Hearing to Landowners Vitiates Acquisition under Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

1 Jan 1970

The Supreme Court heard civil appeals by landowners challenging a Division Bench judgment of the Rajasthan High Court that reversed a Single Judge's o...

8 9 10 11 12

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)