Category - Latest Judgments

The appellants approached the High Court of Judicature at Mumbai, aggrieved by an order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Court No. 2, Nasik dated 07.12.2010 directing them to hand over the custody of the child borne...

Education and Universities — Schools — Employment and Service matter — Appointment — Post of High School Assistant — The 5th respondent worked in the appellant’s school in 3 different spells between 1-10-1997 and 11-3-1998 for a...

Mr. B.V. Balaram Das, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the Union of India, and Mr. Vikas Singh Jangra, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the Governor of Arunachal Pradesh.  

The appellants approached this Court, aggrieved by the order dated 13.12.2011 passed by the High Court of Judicature of Bombay at Mumbai in Appeal No. 598 of 2011, whereby the High Court granted an interim prayer in terms of...

Review — Application for condonation of delay — Maintainability — High court dismissed the review petition on maintainability — Held, the averments in the application for condonation of delay which are far from satisfactory, it...

The only question that has arisen in this appeal is whether a second complaint to the District Forum under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is maintainable when the first complaint was dismissed for default or non-prosecution.

By order dated 10.12.20151, with the consent of the parties, Hon'ble Mr. Justice G.P. Mathur, former Judge of this Court was appointed as an Arbitrator, to resolve each and every issue involved in these matters.

A. Criminal Trial — Judicial balancing — Necessity of a delicate judicial balancing of the competing interests in a criminal trial i.e. the interests of the accused and the public and to a great extent, that too of the victim, at...

The appellants are the legal representatives of late Pratap Singh. He was a driver employed by respondent No. 2-Devendra Singh. During the course of employment, Pratap Singh met with an accident and died. The appellants...

The appellant approached this Court challenging the land acquisition proceedings. The main ground of challenge was that dispensation of Section 5-A inquiry was unjustified and unwarranted. However, the High Court declined to...