Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“Section 4(5) of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 is indicative of fact that the Act being a beneficial legislation, entitlement of employee cannot be reduced below the prescribed ceiling limit under Section 4(3) of Act, rather this provision approves receiving of a better gratuity than what is notified by Central Government.”
“In discussions surrounding the empowerment of women, education is rightly recognized as a fundamental pillar. However, when such incidents occur that force a girl to abandon her studies, the very notion of empowerment is compromised and society at large bears the consequences.”
Amarchand Mangaldas advised Shoden Developers Private Limited, part of the renowned House of Hiranandani Group (“Developer”), on acquiring development rights to the
Calcutta High Court: Shampa Sarkar, J. disposed of a writ petition with certain directions to police authorities in relation to an investigation
Delhi High Court: The Division Bench of Mukta Gupta and Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ., observed that Court cannot assume the duties of
Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai: The Coram of Indira Jain J., (Chairperson) and Dr K. Shivaji, Member (A), expressed that, if
Bombay High Court: Observing that, a developer who has been appointed by the Society and who is eager to proceed with the
Rajasthan High Court: Mahendra Kumar Goyal, J., disposed of the petition directing the Station House officer of the concerned police station to
Uttaranchal High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Manoj K. Tiwari, J. allowed a compounding application as the offence involved was