Search Results for "Custodian discretion"

194 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 194 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Reserves Judgment on Condonation of Delay in Land Acquisition Appeal Filed Beyond 120 Days Under 2013 Act. Issue of Whether Section 5 of Limitation Act Applies to Section 74(1) of Right to Fair Compensation Act, 2013 Remains to be Decided.

The Deputy Commissioner and Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bengaluru (SLAO) filed an appeal under Section 54(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 a...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes Land Acquisition Notification for Lack of Public Purpose. Acquisition of Petitioners' Land for Archaeological Museum Set Aside as Notification Did Not Specify Public Purpose Under Section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

The petitioners, Nidasheshi Veeranna and Gali Prakash, along with Gali Shivabasappa in the connected petition, owned agricultural lands in Sy.No.4/1 a...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Examines Challenge to SEBI Special Court's Rejection of Compounding Application Under Section 24A of SEBI Act. Writ Petition Filed Against Order Denying Compounding of Offence Under Section 24(2) for Non-Payment of Penalty Without SEBI Consent.

The case involved a criminal writ petition filed by N.H. Securities Ltd. and its directors seeking to quash an order of the SEBI Special Court that ha...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal in Specific Performance Suit Due to Limitation and Unenforceable Agreement. Agreement for Sale of compensation pool property held to be contingent on uncertain event of conveyance deed issuance, and suit filed beyond reasonable time barred by limitation.

The appellant, original plaintiff, filed a suit for specific performance of an Agreement for Sale dated 19/01/2010 for a compensation pool property in...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeals in Land Dispute and Teacher Recruitment Cases — Upholds Single Judge's Orders on Limitation and Selection Process. In LPA No.177/2012, appeal dismissed as barred by limitation; in LPA No.288/2011, selection of respondent upheld as per rules.

The judgment comprises two Letters Patent Appeals. LPA No.177/2012 arises from a land dispute where the appellants challenged an order of a Single Jud...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

"Supreme Court Affirms Need for Minority Establishment in AMU’s Minority Status Dispute" AMU’s Minority Status Under Scrutiny: Establishment by Legislature Versus Minority Founding Rights

The Supreme Court judgment in Aligarh Muslim University v. Naresh Agarwal & Ors. primarily deals with the issue of minority rights in education, f...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses MCGM's Challenge to MERC Regulation on Compensation for Delayed Electricity Connections. Regulation 4.10 requiring distribution licensees to pay compensation for failure to provide new connections within stipulated period is valid and not ultra vires the Electricity Act, 2003.

The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM), through its Brihanmumbai Electric Supply & Transport Undertaking (BES&T), filed a writ petition un...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Goa Dismisses Revision Against Rejection of Plaint in Property Dispute — Plaint Discloses Cause of Action and Is Not Barred by Limitation. Order VII Rule 11 CPC Application Fails as Court Must Look Only at Plaint Averments and Not Evidence.

The applicant, Mr. Nilesh Sangodkar, filed a Civil Revision Application under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, challenging the order dat...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal Against Company Law Board Order — Transfer of Shares After BIFR Recommendation Void Under Section 536(2) Companies Act, 1956. Winding Up Deemed to Commence from Date of BIFR Recommendation Under Section 441(2) Companies Act, 1956.

The appellants, Maharashtra Antibiotics and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (MAPL) and Hindustan Antibiotics Ltd., challenged an order of the Company Law Board (...