Search Results for "Article 226"

277 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 277 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Sets Aside NCDRC Order : No Privity of Contract Between Parties, Respondent Not a ‘Consumer’ Under Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Court Holds No Tripartite Agreement Proven, Respondent Not Entitled to Compensation Under Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Privity of Contract Essential for Consumer Status: The Court reiterated that for a person to qualify as a ‘consumer’ under the CPA, t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Refused Permission to Abandon Part of Declaration Claim at the Appellate Stage. 

Order XXIII Rule 1(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Right to Withdraw Suit or Abandon Part of Claim – Appellate Stage – Effect of Trial...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Applicability of Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Restrictions – Leasehold Property – Market Valuation – Stamp Duty Deficit – Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958

A recital affecting market value must be expressly mentioned in the instrument itself or clearly referenced in an annexure to be considered for stamp ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Public Interest Litigation – Suppression of Material Facts – Criminal Contempt – Maintainability of PIL. High Court dismissed the PIL on grounds of suppression of facts, lack of bona fides, and scandalizing the court. Criminal contempt was noted but no proceedings were initiated.

Litigants filing PIL must disclose all material facts and approach the court with clean hands. Scandalizing the court through social media can constit...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Auroville Foundation’s Authority, Sets Aside High Court’s Decision on Standing Order No. 1/2022. Governing Board’s Powers Prevail Over Residents’ Assembly in Auroville Development Dispute

Suppression of Material Facts: A litigant invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution must come wi...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Land Acquisition After 38 Years, Citing Delay and Laches. Petition Barred by Inordinate Delay – Abuse of Process of Law – Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 – Article 226 of the Constitution of India

Delay and Laches: The Court held that a petition filed after an inordinate delay, without any justification, is barred by the principles of delay and ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court dismissed writ petitios challenging notices under Section 153C of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, ruling that disputed questions of fact regarding incriminating material, limitation, and jurisdiction should be agitated before appellate authorities.

Income-Tax Act, 1961 – Section 153C – Limitation, Jurisdiction & Incriminating Material – Writ Petition Not Maintainable The writ petition ...