Search Results for "counsel inadvertence"

275 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 275 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds IIT's Admission Criteria in JEE Advanced Eligibility Challenge. Criterion barring IIT-admitted candidates from subsequent attempts held not discriminatory under Article 14 as it serves public policy objectives of preventing seat wastage and ensuring equitable access.

The dispute arose from a writ petition filed by Soutrik Sarangi challenging Criterion No. 5 of the JEE (Advanced) Information Brochure, which prevente...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Goa Allows Petitioners to Summon Bank Manager and Registrar of Firms as Witnesses in Civil Suit — Trial Court's Rejection Set Aside for Failure to Apply Correct Legal Test Under Order 16 Rule 1 CPC

The petitioners, who are plaintiffs in a civil suit, filed applications under Order 16 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) to summon the...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal in Negotiable Instruments Act Case — Reverses Acquittal and Convicts Accused for Cheque Dishonour. Presumption under Section 139 of N.I. Act stands unless rebutted by accused on preponderance of probabilities.

The appellant, Ashok Kumar, filed a complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. before the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, against t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal in Cheque Dishonour Case — Reverses Acquittal and Convicts Accused Under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Presumption of Legally Enforceable Debt Under Sections 118 and 139 of NI Act Stands Unless Rebutted by Accused.

The appellant, Ashok Kumar, filed a complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. against the respondent, Parameshwara B.T., for the offence punishable under Se...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Amendment of Plaint to Correct Mistake in Description of Plaintiff in Recovery Suit. Inadvertent Error in Naming Individual Instead of Company Held Curable Under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC.

The appellant, Varun Pahwa, as Director of Siddharth Garments Pvt. Ltd., filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 25,00,000/- advanced as loan to the responde...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Employer's Challenge to Industrial Court Order Quashing Recovery of Excess Salary Paid Due to Employer's Mistake. Recovery of Rs.1,94,637/- from Retired Employee Set Aside as Employer's Inadvertence Cannot Be Visited on Employee.

The respondent, Sou. Anjali Anil Tare, was appointed as a Lower Division Clerk (LDC) in 1977 and passed her lower division grade examination in 1980, ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revision Against Conviction Under Section 138 N.I. Act — Presumption of Legally Enforceable Debt Not Rebutted. Accused Failed to Prove Cheques Were Issued as Security, Leading to Confirmation of Sentence of Simple Imprisonment and Compensation.

The applicant, Rekha Mahindra Shah, was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for dishonour of three cheques totaling Rs...