Search Results for "Protest"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Supreme Court Allows Appeal of Claimant in Motor Accident Case — Functional Di...
Supreme Court Modifies Sentence in Forgery Case Due to Long Pendency and No Crim...
Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Partition Suit — Concurrent Findi...
High Court of Bombay at Bombay Dismisses Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Acc...

Search Results for "Protest"

794 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 794 result(s)

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Against High Court Order in Dowry Death Case — Sets Aside Direction for Fresh Consideration of Protest Petition. Magistrate's Order Accepting Final Report Upheld as Protest Petition Was Duly Considered and No Prima Facie Case Was Made Out Under Sections 304B, 498A, 201 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act.

9 Jul 2019

The appeal arose from a criminal case registered under Sections 201, 304B, and 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Land Acquisition Case — Market Value Enhanced from Rs.50,000 to Rs.1,00,000 per Acre Based on Comparable Sale Instance. The court held that the Reference Court erred in ignoring a contemporaneous sale deed for adjacent land, which established a higher market value under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

17 Aug 2012

The appellant, Jaysukh Raghla Patel, filed a first appeal under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, challenging the judgment and order dated...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Quashes Summoning Order Against Accused in Attempt to Murder Case Due to Lack of Prima Facie Evidence. Criminal conspiracy allegations under Section 120B IPC failed as no material showed meeting of minds between accused and main assailants.

10 Jan 2020

The judgment pertains to two criminal petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) by accused Nos. 6 and 7 in C...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Disposes of Appeal Against Shaheen Bagh Protest Blockade as Situation Resolves Itself Due to Pandemic. Right to peaceful protest under Article 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b) is fundamental but subject to reasonable restrictions; indefinite occupation of public roads is not permissible.

7 Oct 2020

The case arose from a public interest litigation filed before the Delhi High Court concerning the blockade of the Kalindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch, i...

High Court

Madras High Court Dismisses Petition Seeking Daily 'Ahimsa Path' Until End of World War — Rejection of Indefinite Protest Permission Upheld as Reasonable Administrative Decision. The Court held that the right to peaceful assembly is not absolute and is subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) and (3) of the Constitution of India, and the police's refusal to permit an indefinite daily protest was not arbitrary.

24 Mar 2026

The petitioner, S. Prabhu, claiming to be the Union Secretary of 'Pathu Roobai Iyakkam', filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution o...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B Applies Separately to Buyer. The right of the buyer to claim refund under Section 11B(2)(e) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is distinct from that of the manufacturer, and the benefit of the second proviso (duty paid under protest) does not extend to the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise duty paid by ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B Applies Separately to Buyer. The Court held that the buyer's refund claim is time-barred as it was filed beyond six months from the date of purchase, and the manufacturer's protest does not extend the limitation for the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise duty paid by ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Central Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B Applies Separately to Buyer. The right of the buyer to claim refund under Section 11B(2)(e) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is distinct from that of the manufacturer, and the benefit of the second proviso (duty paid under protest) does not extend to the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise duty paid by ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B(1) Applies Separately to Buyer. The right of the buyer to claim refund under Section 11B(2)(e) is distinct from the manufacturer's right, and the benefit of the second proviso (waiver of limitation for duty paid under protest) does not extend to the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The Supreme Court dismissed a batch of appeals filed by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central exci...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim in Central Excise Duty Case — Limitation Period Applies Separately to Buyer. The Court held that the period of limitation of six months under Section 11B(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 applies to a buyer's refund claim even if the manufacturer paid duty under protest, as the rights of manufacturer and buyer are distinct.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the appellant/buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise dut...

1 2 3

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)