Search Results for "Separate land compensation"

1222 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1222 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Revision Petition in Consumer Execution Proceedings. Holds that Execution is Continuation of Consumer Dispute Under Section 21(b) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

The present Civil Appeal arose out of execution proceedings initiated by the Respondent-Complainant, K. A. Nagamani, against the Appellant, Karnataka ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Bail Application of Accused in UAPA Case on Grounds of Parity and Merits. Parity with co-accused granted bail is not a valid ground when the applicant's role is distinct and the first bail application was rejected on merits.

The applicant, Dr. Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba, filed a second bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking bail i...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Delivers Judgment in Criminal Appeal Against Conviction for Acid Attack Under Sections 326A and 307 IPC. Evidence Adduced by Prosecution Including Victim Testimony and FSL Report Allegedly Proved the Offences Beyond Reasonable Doubt.

The judgment pertains to a criminal appeal filed by the accused against the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court for offences under Sect...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses DISCOM's Appeal in Solar PPA Force Majeure Dispute — Restrictive Appellate Jurisdiction Under Section 125 of Electricity Act, 2003 Affirmed. Government Delays in Approvals Constitute Force Majeure; No Tariff Reduction or Liquidated Damages When Developer Not at Fault.

The Supreme Court of India dismissed appeals by Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited (BESCOM) against an order of the Appellate Tribunal for E...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Against Railway Land Demolition — No Encroachment Rights on Railway Land. Petitioners failed to establish any legal right to occupy railway land, and the demolition was lawful under the Railways Act, 1989.

The petitioners, seven individuals, filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court challenging the demolition of their structures on land claimed to b...