Search Results for "time limit directory"

151 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 151 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Challenging Sanction and Cognizance in UAPA Case — No Infirmity Found in Sanction Order or Cognizance Order. Court upholds validity of suo-motu sanction under Section 45(2) of UAPA and cognizance order under Section 120B IPC read with UAPA and CLA Act.

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal filed by Fuleshwar Gope challenging the judgment of the Jharkhand High Court which refused to quash the sanctio...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Termination of Contract in Municipal Tender Dispute — Unilateral Termination Without Notice and Opportunity of Hearing Violates Principles of Natural Justice. Contract Termination Set Aside as Arbitrary and Unreasonable Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The petitioner, K.I.P.L. Vistacore Infra Projects J.V., a partnership firm, was awarded a contract by the Ichalkaranjee Municipal Council for a projec...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Holds Section 13(2)(a) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is Directory — District Forum Can Extend Time for Filing Reply Beyond 45 Days in Exceptional Circumstances. The 30-day period for filing reply commences from receipt of notice by the opposite party.

The Supreme Court Constitution Bench addressed two questions referred regarding Section 13(2)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The first quest...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds High Court Ruling That Time Limit Under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act is Directory. The provision requiring District Magistrate to pass possession order within 30 days (extendable to 60 days) is directory, as non-compliance does not invalidate proceedings or prejudice the borrower.

The appeal arose from a judgment of the Kerala High Court which held that the time limit under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Grampanchayat Resolution and Tahsildar's Order in Land Dispute. Court upholds validity of resolution and order, finding no violation of natural justice or statutory provisions.

The petitioners, twelve residents of Sangav, Taluka Kagal, District Kolhapur, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India bef...