admin_nupur

👆📌Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – s.138 – Dishonour of cheque – Trial acquitted accused-appellant – Reversal of acquittal by High Court – Justification – Held: Not justified In order to draw presumption u/s. 118 rlw s. 139, the burden was heavily upon the respondent complainant to have shown that he had the required funds for […]

Meat Plant constructed without previous sanction of Pollution Board, demolished. Without sanction of map under section 14, no construction can be made. 2024 (164) ALR 141- Ms Kamya vs State of UP

the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment on 04.11.2020. The Court clarified that: Key Points: Relevant Laws: Summary: The Supreme Court’s judgment provides clarity on maintenance laws, ensuring that: This judgment makes court decisions in maintenance cases more transparent and just, protecting the rights of both wives and husbands.

समान तथ्यों पर दूसरी प्रोटेस्ट-पिटीशन/कंप्लेंट—पोषणीयता—निर्णीत, विधि की दृष्टि में समान तथ्यों पर दूसरी प्रोटेस्ट-पिटीशन/कंप्लेंट दायर करना प्रतिबन्धित नहीं है, लेकिन यह इस तथ्य पर निर्भर करता है कि पहली प्रोटेस्ट-पिटीशन/कंप्लेंट किस आधार पर ख़ारिज की गई थी—यदि पहली प्रोटेस्ट-पिटीशन/कंप्लेंट को मेरिट्स पर और कानून के अनुसार खारिज कर दिया गया था, तो लगभग समान तथ्यों

• The Madhya Pradesh High Court observed that the detention under National Security Act cannot be extended in the name of public interest merely for a crime committed by another person • The Court quashed the impugned order extending the detention period under the National Security Act, 1980 (NSA), which was challenged by the petitioner

• The Madhya Pradesh High Court observed that the detention under National Security Act cannot be extended in the name of public interest merely for a crime committed by another person • The Court quashed the impugned order extending the detention period under the National Security Act, 1980 (NSA), which was challenged by the petitioner

Limitation in a suit for composite relief. The limitation is fixed on the basis of substantive or main relief in the suit. When a composite suit is filed for cancellation of the sale deed as well as for recovery of possession, limitation for suit shall be three years to start from the date cause of

🌟 दस्तावेज़ को अदालत में साक्ष्य के रूप में प्रस्तुत किए जाने से पहले जालसाजी की गई हो तो CrPC की धारा 195 लागू नहीं होती: सुप्रीम कोर्ट जालसाजी के आरोपों से जुड़े मामले से निपटते हुए सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने हाल ही में दोहराया कि न्यायालय में दायर दस्तावेजों की जालसाजी के आरोप की जांच