Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Delhi High Court: Stating that, Rape is an act against society, Rajnish Bhatnagar, J., held that simply entering into a compromise allegation
Delhi High Court: Subramonium Prasad, J., while explaining the facets of cancellation of bail and rejection of an application for bail, made
Allahabad High Court: Dr Y.K. Srivastava, J., while examining the ambit and scope of Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
Delhi High Court: Chandra Dhari Singh, J., while addressed an issue with regard to maintenance and stated that, There may be alternative
Allahabad High Court: Dr Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J., while examining the scope of the writ of habeas corpus, expressed that, The power
Delhi High Court: Subramonium Prasad, J., expressed that, “…it is unfortunate that institutions that are supposed to protect the life and liberty
Supreme Court: Explaining the scope of jurisdiction of ITAT, the bench of MR Shah* and BV Nagarathna, JJ has held that the
Bombay High Court: Sandeep K. Shinde, J., held that an aggrieved person cannot choose to file a petition under Section 12 of
Supreme Court: The Division Bench of Ajay Rastogi* and Abhay S. Oka, JJ., set aside the judgment of the Delhi High
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): Expressing its opinion of ‘Condonation of Delay’, Coram of C. Viswanath (Presiding Member) and Justice Ram
Supreme Court: In a case where the Punjab and Haryana High Court not only set aside the judgment of the District Judge
Uttaranchal High Court: Emphasizing on the purpose and object of Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Division bench of
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): Coram of Justice R.K. Agrawal (President) and Dr S.M. Kantikar (Member)reiterated that the presence of an
Andhra Pradesh High Court: M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J., expressed that, “If a party to the document wants to annul the document, he
Supreme Court: The bench of Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ has explained the scope of a “very strange provision” under Section
by Hiroo Advani† and Manav Nagpal††
Cite as: 2021 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 73
“Craftsmanship on the judicial side cannot transgress into the legislative domain by re-writing the words of a statute.”
Bombay High Court: Reiterating the well-settled position that, contractual employees are not the employees of the principal employer, N.B. Suryawanshi, J., held
Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DSCDRC): Coram of Dr Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal (President) and Anil Srivastava (Member)ordered the builder to
Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: Tashi Rabstan, J., while addressing the syllogistic issue of ‘venue and ‘seat’ of arbitration dismissed