[Civil Appeal No.9699 of 2014 arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.33699 of 2011] Dipak Misra, J. Leave granted. The Universal Construction Company, the respondent No. 3 herein, instituted Civil Suit No. 480 of 1971 in the High Court of Calcutta invoking its original civil jurisdiction for realization of a sum of Rs.2,15,289.28 paise from the […]
Recent SC Judgement – Sameer Singh Vs. Abdul Rab – 14.10.14 Read More »
NEW DELHI: The CBI courted a string of controversies in 2014, including those surrounding its chief Ranjit Sinha and the Supreme Court’s reprimands over closure reports in coal scam cases and flip-flops in 2G probe, as it tried to keep its reputation as the nation’s premier investigating agency. The case of the mysteriopus death of
Like Badaun case, year full of twists for CBI Read More »
NEW DELHI: From scams in coal, cricket to CBI, the Supreme Court’s orders and observations in dealing with these cases in 2014 dealt a heavy blow to the credibility of the Manmohan Singh-led UPA government indirectly helping the Narendra Modi-led BJP to stage a stunning victory in the general elections. In maintaining the supremacy of
From coal to cricket, Supreme Court continued its clean-up act through 2014 Read More »
ISLAMABAD/NEW DELHI: Islamabad high court on Monday suspended the detention order of ZakiurRehmanLakhvi, the key planner of 2008 Mumbai attacks, according to Times Now. Lakhvi had challenged his detention under a public security order in the high court here after the Pakistan government rejected his plea seeking release. In the petition Lakhvi’s counsel Raja Rizwan
Islamabad high court suspends 26/11 accused Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi’s detention order Read More »
[Civil Appeal No. 6862 of 2014 arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 6757 of 2012] Dipak Misra, J. The centrirorial issue that has stemmed in this appeal by grant of special leave is whether an order of dismissal of the counter-claim being barred by principles of Order 2, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil
Recent SC Judgement – Rajni Rani Vs. Khairati Lal – 14.10.14 Read More »
[Civil Appeal No. 1740 of 2007] R.F. NARIMAN, J. 1. In this Civil Appeal an interesting question arises for decision. One Nand Singh and Dr. Thakar Singh filed a suit for recovery for possession of various shops cum vacant sites situated in the main Bazar of Moga Town against 14 defendants. The suit property had
[Civil Appeal No. 9681 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No.26124/2013] Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. 1. We have perused the Office Report dated 10.10.2014. It discloses that despite last opportunity granted to the respondent, he has not filed any counter affidavit till date. Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, there was
Recent SC Judgement – Vinod Kumar Vs. Gangadhar – 13.10.14 Read More »
[Civil Appeal No.9658 of 2014 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.1627 of 2014] ANIL R. DAVE, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel. 2. Leave granted. 3. In this appeal, the appellant – an auction purchaser, has challenged the validity of the judgment dated 13th December, 2013, delivered in Civil Revision Petition No.6528 of
Recent SC Judgement – Guttikonda Venkataramaiah Vs. Godavarthy Venkateswarlu – 13.10.14 Read More »
NEW DELHI: Former Delhi law minister Somnath Bharti on Friday won relief from the Delhi high court which set aside an NHRC order passed against him unilaterally in connection with the Khirki Extension raid. A vacation bench of Justices S Muralidhar and Manmohan Singh quashed the September 29 NHRC order as it was passed without
Khirki raid: HC relief for Bharti Read More »
NEW DELHI: Startling facts revealed by probe agencies on plots hatched by banned outfits made headlines in 2014 in Delhi courts which noted that Osama bin Laden was still the driving force for terror groups following footsteps of ISIS to create situation like Iraq and Syria. A tug of war was also witnessed between a
2014: Names of Osama, ISIS surfaced in Delhi courts Read More »
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.
