1. This appeal is at the instance of the original third, second, and fourth defendants. The first and second respondents are the original plaintiffs. The third respondent is the mother of the deceased original first defendant...

1. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in Civil Appeal have filed O.S. No. 13/2000 before the Court of Principal District Judge at Vishakhapatnam. The suit is for partition and possession of plaint schedule property. The prayer reads thus:

1. Though factually different, these appeals involve common question of law - whether the purchase of a vehicle/good by a Company for the use/personal use of its directors would amount to purchase for “commercial purpose” within...

1. For the convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided in the following parts:—

1. The substantial question arising for decision in this civil appeal is whether upon admission of an instrument in evidence and its marking as an exhibit by a court (despite the instrument being chargeable to duty but is...

1. The Sessions Court convicted the appellant-accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, ‘IPC’) for committing the murder of Smt Hemwati Bai, who was his stepmother.

1. Leave granted.

1. The petitioner, an entity incorporated in the United Arab Emirates, was purportedly approached by the respondents to finance a telecommunication project undertaken by Telesuprecon Nigeria Limited (TNL).

1. Thankamma George/Appellant, and Lilly Thomas/Respondent No. 1, are sisters, and the daughters of one late George. P.M. Thomas/Respondent No. 2 is the husband of Respondent No. 1.

1. Though factually different, these appeals involve common question of law - whether the purchase of a vehicle/good by a Company for the use/personal use of its directors would amount to purchase for “commercial purpose” within...