Search Results for "Vacation Court"

668 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 668 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes No-Confidence Motion Against Gram Panchayat President for Non-Compliance with Mandatory Notice Period. Notice period of 15 days under Section 49(2A) of Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 is mandatory and cannot be waived; motion passed on 14th day invalid.

The petitioner, Smt. Sharanamma, was the President of Hiresingangutti Gram Panchayat. A no-confidence motion was moved against her by 18 members of th...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Challenging SCEA Directive Excluding Retired Employees from Voter List in Salary Earner's Co-operative Bank Elections. Directive Issued Without Authority Under Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, and Bye-laws Permitting Retired Members to Vote Must Be Respected.

The petitioners, Nashik Zilla Sarkari and Parishad Karmachari Sahakari Bank Ltd. (a salary earner's co-operative bank) and some of its retired employe...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Appellant in Daughter's Murder Case Due to Insufficient Circumstantial Evidence. Conviction under Section 302 IPC for Strangulation Set Aside as Prosecution Failed to Prove Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt.

The appellant, Abbas Nawaj Shaikh, was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of his daughter Heena by strangulation. The...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction for Kidnapping and Rape of Minor Under POCSO Act — Age of Victim Determined by Ossification Test and School Records, Consent Irrelevant for Minor.

The appellant, Sujoy @ Sanjay Laltu Chakravarty, was convicted by the Special Judge, Gondia, in Special POCSO Case No. 11/2014 for offences under Sect...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Denial of Cross-Examination in Civil Suit — Right to Cross-Examine Restored with Condition of Same-Day Examination. The court held that the right to cross-examine is valuable but can be conditioned on cooperation for speedy disposal.

The petitioners, who are defendants in a civil suit, challenged an order of the trial court that denied them permission to cross-examine the plaintiff...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Students to Appear for Final D.Ed. Examination Despite Lack of NCTE Recognition at Admission. Students Admitted in 2004-05 to Unrecognized Course Permitted to Take Final Exam Under Interim Orders.

The petitioners, approximately 50 students, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court seeking permission to appear for the final (second year...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal Under Section 6 of Specific Relief Act for Possession Based on Prior Possession. The court held that the appellant had established prior possession and dispossession without consent, entitling her to a decree for possession under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.

The appellant, Cian De Souza, filed a suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, seeking vacation and peaceful possession of Flat No.4, Ha...