“In certain situations, it may be expedient to leave it to the arbitrator to determine the issue as to whether stamping is insufficient, and if so, the arbitrator will take recourse to Section 33 of the Stamp Act, 1889.”
Mere inclusion of the name in the select list does not confer any right to claim for appointment.
Supreme Court said that the degree or dimension of the offence should not be the direct approach of the Court in its inquiry into juvenility of an accused or convict.
The Supreme Court was of the view that the Union of India’s claim for a ‘top up’ had no foundation in any known legal principle. Either a settlement was valid, or it was to be set aside in cases where it was vitiated by fraud. However, no such fraud had been pleaded by the Center.
The relief claimed in the present suit by Late Shri S.K. Beri was specifically against Deepak Beri and his family members. Deepak Beri has contested the suit by filing a written statement controverting the averments made to the plaint and seeking dismissal of the present suit.
Delhi High Court: In a review petition filed under Section 114 read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code on behalf
The petition had sought review of order directing the Gujarat Government to consider the application for pre-mature release of one of the Bilkis Bano Gangrape convicts, under its policy dated 09.07.1992, which was existing at the time of his conviction.
In a matter relating to criminal proceedings against Reliance Industries, SEBI had failed to comply with the Supreme Court’s order directing it to furnish a copy of documents, leading to initiation of contempt proceedings against SEBI.
Supreme Court: In a review petition filed by Axis Bank against Supreme Court’s judgment in Vidarbha Industries Power Ltd. v.
Supreme Court: As Congress MP Karti P. Chidambaram has sought review of the 3-judge bench verdict on the Prevention of Money Laundering
Madhya Pradesh High Court: The Division Bench of Ravi Malimath, CJ. and Vishal Mishra, J. dismissed a second review petition holding that
“There is a bounden duty cast on the Courts to elicit information of all the relevant factors and consider those regarding the possibility of reformation, even if the accused remains silent.”
Kerala High Court: A Division Bench of A. Hariprasad and T.V. Anilkumar, JJ., while addressing a review petition, reiterated that the relevant date
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and MR Shah has reiterated that when the main judgment of the
Supreme Court: The bench of UU Lalit and Dr. DY Chandrachud, JJ has refused to review it’s verdict in B K Pavitra
Supreme Court: A five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court today dismissed the curative petition filed by Pawan Kumar Gupta, a death
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of R Banumathi, Ashok Bhushan and Navin Sinha, JJ has said that it will hear on March
Supreme Court: A 3-judge bench of R. Banumathi, Ashok Bhushan and AS Bopanna, JJ has dismissed the plea seeking review of the
Supreme Court: A 5-judge bench of NV Ramana, Arun Mishra, RF Nariman, R. Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan, JJ has rejected the curative
Supreme Court: Dismissing the petition filed Nirbhaya gang-rape and murder convict Mukesh Kumar Singh, challenging the rejection of his mercy petition by