Search Results for "Section 237"

765 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 765 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses PIL Challenging Land Allotment to Educational Trust Due to Delay and Laches. Allotment of 1999 and 2008 not challenged until 2013, petition held not maintainable.

The petitioners, residents of village Dhangawadi, filed a Public Interest Litigation under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the al...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Interception Orders in CBI Corruption Case for Lack of Reasons and Public Emergency. Orders under Section 5(2) of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 set aside as they merely recited statutory language without recording cogent reasons demonstrating public safety or public emergency.

The petitioner, Shyamalendu Kumar Das, a Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), challenged two orders dated 9 March 2018 and 17 March 2018 passed...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru considers batch of income tax appeals under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 challenging ITAT orders for assessment years 2001-02 to 2004-05. Assessee and Revenue both seek to set aside the ITAT decisions and frame substantial questions of law.

The High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru dealt with a batch of income tax appeals filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeals a...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Examines Constitutionality of National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, in Malegaon Blast Case. Petitioners Challenged Legislative Competence and Transfer of Investigation Without State Consent, Arguing Encroachment on State Police Powers.

The matter arose from two criminal writ petitions filed in the Bombay High Court challenging the constitutional validity of the National Investigation...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 1338 OF 2020

...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Revision Petition in Partition Suit — Upholds Trial Court Order Refusing to Reopen Evidence. Court holds that Order 18 Rule 17 CPC cannot be used to fill gaps in evidence or to allow a party to adduce additional evidence after closure of evidence.

The petitioners, who are defendants in a partition suit, filed a revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) challe...