Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“It was observed that even in the petition filed before the District Magistrate, the appellants produced only postal receipt and copy of paper publication, and proof of service of personal notice was not produced.”
“Merely admitting evidence on record is not proof of a fact-in-issue or a relevant fact… Admitting evidence is mere inclusion of evidence in record, to be assessed on a comprehensive set of factors, parameters and aspects, in the discretion of the court.”
Calcutta High Court allowed the writ petition, emphasising the importance of following legal provisions in appointments to public offices and maintaining the integrity of the Waqf Board.
“In the context of Section 14 of Limitation Act, 1963, what needs to be seen is whether appellant has brought on the record any evidence to show that he is prosecuting the previously instituted suit with due diligence.”
“The scope of writ jurisdiction cannot be allowed to trounce the statutory obligation, on the stratagem of efficacious alternate remedy.”
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1950 on Hyderabad Limitation Act, 1322 Fasli and Sections 14 and 15 of the Limitation Act, 1908.
Delhi High Court observed that that the Sole Arbitrator was well within its jurisdiction to declare the Agreement dated 23-03-2001 as determinable agreement in view of the statement of claim of the respondent and Terms of the said Agreement.
Calcutta High Court: In a petition challenging the appointment of sole Arbitrator by the respondent, Shekhar B. Saraf, J., held
Bombay High Court: While deciding the instantwrit petition wherein the issue was regarding transgression of Additional District Magistrate’s jurisdiction under Section 14
Constitutional Court of South Africa: A 10-Judge Bench comprising of Zondo, ACJ., Cameron, Froneman, Jafta, Madlanga, Mhlantla, Theron, JJ., Kathree-Setiloane, Kollapen, Zondi,