rouse avenue court, delhi
Case BriefsDistrict Court

Delhi Court observed that it is crucial for Delhi Commission for Women to focus on substantive actions rather than superficial gestures just for the sake of publicity and bringing the name in newspaper or to find fault in the other institution when equal responsibility lies with them also.

competitive exam
Case BriefsHigh Courts

If the Court would allow such an interpretation, then this provision would become redundant, and a floodgate of law graduates, who may not be enrolled with the bar councils to become an ‘advocate’ but are still practicing law, would pour in. The purpose of keeping the proceedings fact-based and free expert legal advisory, would be lost.

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

    Delhi High Court: C Hari Shankar, J. opined that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 will apply in respect

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Chhattisgarh High Court: Narendra Kumar Vyas J. allowed the petition and remarked “any victim of sexual harassment at workplace should not run

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Delhi High Court: Noting allegations against an employer with regard to the sexual harassment Sanjeev Sachdeva, J., expressed that, “…instead of providing

Op EdsOP. ED.

by Charvi Devprakash†

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Kerala High Court: The Division Bench of A.M. Shaffique and Gopinath P., JJ., while observing a matter in regard to sexual harassment at