Search Results for "arbitrary levy"

582 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 582 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses PIL Challenging Constitutionality of Section 394(1) CrPC for Lack of Distinction Between Pre- and Post-Death Acquittal in NI Act Cases. The court held that the provision is not unconstitutional and the petition lacked merit.

The petitioner, G Varadaraju, an 89-year-old individual appearing in person, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of I...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Contractor's Writ Petition for Non-Prosecution Due to Absence and Vague Submission. Petitioner failed to appear and counsel left matters to court's imagination, leading to dismissal under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

The petitioner, a registered Class-I Contractor, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court o...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Property Owners' Petitions Against BBMP for Issuing Form-B Without Form-A. Statutory Scheme Under Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 Mandates Sequential Issuance of Property Tax Registers.

The judgment concerns two writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by property owners against the Bruhath Bangalore Mahanag...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes Penalty Imposed by MUDA on Allottee for Violation of Natural Justice — Penalty Without Show Cause Notice Set Aside. Succession Rights Recognized and Authority Directed to Follow Due Process Before Imposing Penalty.

The petitioner, Radhika Bhat, filed a writ petition challenging an endorsement dated 23-11-2016 issued by the Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petitions Challenging Seizure of Vehicles Under Maharashtra Land Revenue Code — Seizure Without Notice and Opportunity of Hearing Held Illegal. Section 53 of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 Does Not Authorize Seizure of Vehicles; Principles of Natural Justice Violated.

The petitioners filed multiple writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Eviction Notice Under Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 — Non-Speaking Final Notice Held Valid as No Adjudication Required at Section 6 Stage. Petitioners Failed to Exhaust Statutory Appeal Remedy Under Section 10 of the Act.

The petitioners, Karupayee and Thangamani, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madras High Court challengi...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Rejection of Application to Send Documents to Fingerprint Expert in Specific Performance Suit. Trial court's discretion upheld as defendant did not dispute documents; plaintiff can seek expert opinion at evidence stage.

The petitioner, who is the plaintiff in O.S.No.165/2014 pending before the Civil Judge and JMFC, Savanur, filed a suit for specific performance of con...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes State Transport Appellate Tribunal Order in Motor Vehicles Act Case — Lack of Jurisdiction to Review Own Orders. The Tribunal cannot review its own orders under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, as no power of review is conferred by the Act or Rules.

The petitioners, who are private bus operators, filed writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dat...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Writ Petition for Condonation of Delay in Investment Under Section 54EC of Income Tax Act, 1961 — CBDT's Rejection Set Aside. The CBDT's power under Section 119(2)(b) is not circumscribed by any time limit and must be exercised liberally to avoid hardship.

The petitioner, Dr. Sujatha Ramesh, sold an immovable property during the Assessment Year 2013-14 and realized long-term capital gains. To claim exemp...