Search Results for "Unauthorised construction"

549 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 549 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

“Mandatory Injunction vs Possession: Supreme Court Clarifies Section 41(h) Specific Relief Act (2026 INSC 61)”“Cloud on Title & Possession: Why Injunction Suit Fails

In Sanjay Paliwal v. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd., the plaintiffs sought a mandatory injunction to remove a wall allegedly blocking access to their l...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Rejection of Application for Adverse Inference and Denial of Cross-Examination in Commercial Suit. Trial Court's Discretion Upheld as No Perversity or Arbitrariness Shown Under Article 227 of Constitution of India.

The petitioner, Sivagami N., was the first defendant in a commercial suit (Com.OS 64/2022) pending before the LXXXV Additional City Civil and Sessions...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Unreliable Testimony of Interested Witnesses. Conviction under Section 302 IPC set aside as sole eyewitness was a close relative with contradictions, and other witnesses turned hostile.

The appellant, Manohar Gangaram Patil, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Brihan Mumbai, for the murder of his uncle, Kashinath Ramchandr...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Holds Husband Guilty of Contempt for Wilful Disobedience of Maintenance Order. Non-compliance with Family Court's maintenance order for over two years despite notice of contempt petition amounts to wilful disobedience under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

The contempt petition was filed by the wife, Amita B Devnani, against her husband Bhagwan H Devnani and others, alleging wilful disobedience of an ord...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Property Dispute — Consent Terms Not Binding on Applicants Under Order 21 Rule 99 CPC. Court holds that applicants who were not parties to consent terms are entitled to restoration of possession or alternative accommodation.

The case involves an appeal filed by the plaintiffs (appellants) against an order of a learned single Judge in a Chamber Summons taken out by Responde...