Search Results for "Section 114 Evidence Act"

2059 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 2059 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Customs Prosecution for Export of Antiquities — Prosecution Under Customs Act Not Barred by Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972. Held that the Customs Act, 1962 applies alongside the Antiquities Act, and prosecution under Sections 132 and 135 is maintainable.

The appeal arose from a judgment of the Delhi High Court upholding the discharge of the respondent, Sharad Gandhi, from offences under Sections 132 an...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Union of India in Section 17A Challenge — Prior Approval Requirement for Investigating Public Servants is Constitutionally Valid. Read Down to Mandate Independent Screening; Lokpal to Approve for Covered Public Servants.

The writ petition was filed by the Centre for Public Interest Litigation challenging the constitutional validity of Section 17A of the Prevention of C...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Full Bench of Bombay High Court Determines Reference on Maintainability of Section 18 Reference Under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 After 2013 Act Came into Force. Key Issue Involves Whether Landowners Can Seek Enhancement Under Old Act When Award Passed After Commencement of 2013 Act.

Background: The matter arose from a land acquisition proceeding initiated by the Pune Municipal Corporation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. A no...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

KAHC010306442014_1

...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal Against Rejection of Plaint in Forest Land Dispute — Non-Compliance of Section 114(A) Notice Not Fatal at Threshold Stage. Notice under Section 114(A) of Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 is procedural and not a bar to maintainability of suit for declaration and injunction.

The appellants, Sidramayya and Roopa, filed a Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging the judgment and...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Jurisdiction of Civil Court in Possession Dispute Involving Family Members. Section 33 of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 Held Not to Bar Suit as Tenancy Question Not Directly Arising.

The appeal before the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court arose from an order of a learned Single Judge deciding a preliminary issue of jurisdicti...

© 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...