Search Results for "long delay"

4551 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 4551 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Habeas Corpus Petition Challenging Preventive Detention Due to Unexplained Delay Between Arrest and Detention Order. Unexplained Delay of Over One Month Snaps Live and Proximate Link, Rendering Detention Order Under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 Invalid.

The petitioner, Rani, mother of the detenu Sidharaj, filed a Habeas Corpus Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the det...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Habeas Corpus Petition in Preventive Detention Case Due to Unexplained Delay. Delay of 51 days between arrest and detention order held to snap live link, rendering detention invalid under Article 22(5) of Constitution.

The petitioner, Pavithra R, the elder sister of the detenu Ajith Kumar, filed a Habeas Corpus Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Habeas Corpus Petition Due to Unexplained Delay in Preventive Detention Order. Delay of 35 Days Between Arrest and Detention Order Under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 Snaps Live and Proximate Link, Rendering Detention Invalid.

The petitioner, Srinivasan, father of the detenu Indhu @ Indumathi, filed a Habeas Corpus Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India chal...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Dismisses/Quashes? Not known. Petitions by Agricultural University challenging trade union complaints on behalf of retired employees regarding pension dues allegedly beyond limitation.

The matter comprises a batch of writ petitions filed by Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth Rahuri against Ahmednagar Zilla Shet Mazoor Union, various ret...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Partly Allows Appeal by BMTC in Motor Accident Claim, Reduces Compensation Due to Multiplier Error. Tribunal's Use of Multiplier '18' for Deceased Aged 30 Years Held Incorrect; Proper Multiplier is '17' Under Sarla Verma Guidelines.

The appellant, Managing Director of Motor Claims Hub, BMTC, challenged the judgment and award dated 01.01.2022 passed by the XIV Additional Small Caus...