[Civil Appeal No. 474 of 2013] [Civil Appeal No. 475 of 2013] [Civil Appeal No. 476 of 2013] [Civil Appeal No. 477 of 2013] [Civil Appeal No. 478 of 2013] [Civil Appeal No. 482 of 2013] [Civil Appeal No. 483 of 2013] [Civil Appeal No. 484 of 2013] [Civil Appeal No. 485 of 2013] [Civil […]
Recent SC Judgement – Patel Jathabhai Punajbhai Vs. North Gujarat University – 28.01.15 Read More »
[Civil Appeal No. 1232 of 2015 arising out of SLP (Civil) No.16099 of 2012] R.F.Nariman, J. 1. Special leave granted. 2. The instant appeal by way of a Special Leave to Appeal has been filed against the judgment and final order dated April 27, 2012 passed by the High Court of Gauhati, Shillong Bench at
Recent SC Judgement – Shri. Westarly Dkhar Vs. Shri. Sehekaya Lyngdoh – 28.01.15 Read More »
[Civil Appeal No. 1182 of 2015 arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No.431 of 2015] Chelameswar, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. Aggrieved by an interim order passed by the High Court of Calcutta in AST No.432 of 2014 dated 23.12.2014, the respondents 1 and 2 therein preferred the instant appeal. The relevant portion of
Recent SC Judgement – Union of India Vs. Sova Ispat Ltd. – 27.01.15 Read More »
NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Monday reiterated its stand that Aadhar cards will not be mandatory for availing government benefits including subsidies. The top court asked the Centre to follow its 2013 order on the issue. The apex court had in October 2013 refused to make Aadhar card compulsory for availing social benefits, turning down
Aadhar not mandatory for availing govt benefits, SC reiterates Read More »
Former Telecom minister Dayanidhi Maran and his brother Kalanithi Maran Monday filed separate petitions challenging the jurisdiction of special 2G court to try the Aircel-Maxis deal case in which they have been summoned as accused along with others. Special CBI judge O P Saini issued notice to the CBI seeking their response on the pleas
Aircel-Maxis case: Marans challenge CBI court’s jurisdiction Read More »
MUMBAI: A married person cannot take advantage of his or her own wrong to seek divorce, the Bombay high court said while dismissing a woman’s case for grant of divorce on her admission of having deserted her husband. The woman, Malini Videshi (name changed) had challenged the Bandra family court’s refusal to pass divorce orders
To seek divorce, a married person cannot take advantage of his own mistake, says HC Read More »
[Civil Appeal No.4235 of 2014] Cricket Association of Bihar Vs. Board of Control for Cricket in India & Ors. [Civil Appeal No.4236 of 2014] Cricket Association of Bihar Vs. The Board of Control for Cricket in India & ANR. [Civil Appeal No. of 2015 arising out of SLP (C) No.34228 of 2014] T.S. THAKUR, J.
[Civil Appeal No. 5838 of 2012] [Civil Appeal No. 5839 of 2012] [Civil Appeal No. 11197 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No. 3202 of 2014] O R D E R In the Judgment dated 15th December, 2014 passed in Civil Appeal No.5838 of 2012 and other connected matters, the date ‘23.10.1989’ mentioned in
Recent SC Judgement – K.K. Sharma Vs. High Court of Delhi – 22.01.15 Read More »
[I.A. No. 8 of 2014 in Civil Appeal No.7424 of 2013] [I.A. No. 5 in Civil Appeal No. 7425 of 2013] [I.A. No. 19 of Civil Appeal No. 7426 of 2013] [I.A. No. 15 in Civil Appeal No. 7427 of 2013] [I.A. No. 3 in Civil Appeal No. 7428 of 2013] [I.A. No. 3 in
Recent SC Judgement – Karnail Kaur Vs. State of Punjab – 22.01.15 Read More »
[I.A. 15-18 in Civil Appeal No(s). 5877-5878/2014 (for modification/clarification and office report] [I.A.No. 3 in C.A. No. 5879/2014 With appln.(s) for modification/clarification and Office Report] [I.A.Nos. 23-24 in C.A. No. 5880-5881/2014 With appln.(s) for modification/clarification and Office Report] [R.P. (C) 210-211 of 2015 in C.A.No. 5880-5881/2014 for c/delay in filing Review Petition and for oral
In accordance with the Bar Council of India rules, Law Intellect India does not solicit work or advertise through this website. By clicking ‘I agree,’ you acknowledge that you are accessing this information voluntarily and that no attorney-client relationship is created through this site.
The content on this website is for informational purposes only and should not be taken as legal advice. We disclaim any liability for actions taken based on the information provided. For personalized legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.
Please review and accept our Privacy Policy before using this website. All intellectual property rights related to the website and its content belong to the Firm.
