Search Results for "District Grievance Redressal Officer"

359 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 359 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Lok Adalat Award for Lack of Valid Reference Under Section 20 of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. Petitioner's Signature Obtained Without Proper Procedure Renders Award Void.

The petitioner, Madhukar Baburao Shete, a senior citizen with 95% physical disability, challenged an award passed by the Lok Adalat in Regular Civil S...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Rape Case Due to Inconsistent Evidence and Lack of Corroboration. Conviction under Sections 376, 506 read with Section 34 IPC set aside as prosecutrix's testimony was unreliable and medical evidence did not support rape.

The appeals arise from a common judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Shrirampur in Sessions Case No. 75 of 199...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad Dismisses Application Under Section 482 CrPC Challenging Magistrate's Refusal to Order Police Investigation Under Section 156(3) CrPC — Magistrate's Discretion to Treat Application as Complaint Upheld as Legal and Proper.

The applicant, Nikhil s/o Dhondiram Katke, filed a criminal application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) challenging a...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Goa Hears Writ Petition Challenging Administrative Tribunal Orders in Mundkarial Dispute. Key Issue Whether Mamlatdar Had Jurisdiction to Determine Mundkarial Rights When Reference Was Made Under Section 32 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Mundkars (Protection from Eviction) Act, 1975.

The litigation originated from two civil suits filed in 1992 by M/s. Suvarn Rajaram Bandekar Discretionary Trust against one Armando Cardozo for remov...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitions Challenging Locus of Parents in Fee Regulation. Individual parents held to have standing under Maharashtra Educational Institutes (Regulation of Fees) Act to approach Divisional Fee Regulatory Committee.

The Bombay High Court heard two writ petitions challenging the locus of individual parents to approach the Divisional Fee Regulatory Committee (DFRC) ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Adjudicates Writ Petitions Challenging Mandatory Pre-Deposit under Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944. The court examined whether the mandatory deposit requirement violated Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India.

The High Court of Karnataka heard a batch of writ petitions filed by several assessees, including Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Prestige Garde...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows State's Appeal in Land Acquisition Interest Claim — Limitation Period for Suit Under Section 48 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Is Three Years. Suit filed after 11 years from compensation payment held barred by limitation.

The case involves a second appeal filed by the State of Maharashtra and the Executive Engineer against the judgment and decree of the lower appellate ...