Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
In writ petitions challenging notices issued under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 restraining landowners from obstructing drainage work, the Court held that the action constituted a statutory flood mitigation measure backed by law and did not amount to deprivation of property under Article 300-A, thereby rejecting the challenge.
The Bombay High Court held that as ‘Body Building’ had state recognition earlier and is nationally recognized, its exclusion violated Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
“The investors were induced to deposit amounts in Indian currency with promises of receiving returns in dollars, including 2% daily, 60% monthly, and 720% annually. It was alleged that the total investment in the scheme exceeded Rs 50 crore.”
“Even assuming the married lady had some relation prior to her marriage with the applicant, and that the applicant had lent money to her on assurance of marriage, that cannot be construed as giving a license to the applicant to post objectionable post over the social site.”