Search Results for "Patna High Court"

882 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 882 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Hears Appeals Against Single Judge's Order on State Government's Authority Over Inter-State Electricity Transmission. The Court examined whether the State Government could extend its Order to inter-state transmission of electricity under the Electricity Act, 2003.

The High Court of Karnataka heard a batch of writ appeals filed by the State Load Dispatch Centre (SLDC), Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Lim...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Hears Appeal Against Company Law Board Order in Oppression and Mismanagement Petition. Company Appeal No.19 of 2009 Challenges CLB's Findings on Reduction of Shareholding, Removal of Director, and Valuation of Land Under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956.

The case involved a dispute between shareholders of Pantheon Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., a company formed to acquire and develop a 13-acre property in M...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Considers Husband's Appeal Against Dismissal of Divorce Petition on Grounds of Desertion and Cruelty Under Hindu Marriage Act. Family Court Had Dismissed Divorce Granting Alimony; High Court Examines Whether False 498A Complaint and Separation Constitute Cruelty and Desertion.

The appeal arose from the judgment of the Family Court, Pune, in Divorce Petition No. 926 of 1995, wherein the appellant-husband sought dissolution of...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Anganwari Sevika Appointment Case Due to Invalid Disqualification Clause. Clause 4.9 of Anganwari Sevika Guidelines, 2011 Was Struck Down as Unconstitutional Under Articles 14 and 16, Making Appellant's Disqualification Based on Father's Government Service Unsustainable.

The appeal arose from a dispute over the appointment of an Anganwari Sevika in Katihar district. The appellant and respondent No. 8 both applied for t...