person resident in India
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Court held that the respondents-firm were “persons resident in India” and several FEMA Regulations relied upon by the Directorate of Enforcement became inapplicable. Since these Regulations govern transactions involving persons resident outside India, they could not be invoked against respondents who were legally resident in India under FEMA.

arbitrary travel obstruction of protestors
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“The law requires prior permission before conducting demonstrations, and when such permission is granted, conditions must be respected.”

Case BriefsSupreme Court

“Merely because no provision in the Act makes the transaction void or says that no title in the property passes to the purchaser in case there is contravention of the provisions of Section 31, will be of no avail. That does not validate the transfer referred to in Section 31, which is not backed by “previous” permission of the RBI.”

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: Dealing with the question whether the Parliament was competent to enact the National Highways Act, 1956 and the National Highway

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of AM Khanwilkar*, BR Gavai and Krishna Murari, JJ has held that it is not necessary for