admin_nupur

High Courts Wife Not Liable U/S 138 NI Act For Cheque Drawn By Husband From Joint Account: Punjab & Haryana_________ The Punjab and Haryana High Court observed that the wife cannot be held liable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for a cheque drawn by her husband from their joint account. The Court, […]

××××× Legal Updade ××××× ðŸ…¾️धारा 307 आईपीसी | ‘साधारण चोटें, बार-बार या गंभीर आघात नहीं’: सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने हत्या के प्रयास के लिए दोषसिद्धि को पलट दिया ===+====+====+====+=== 🔵सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने 28 नवंबर को हत्या के प्रयास के तहत दोषसिद्धि को रद्द करते हुए दो कारकों को महत्व दिया। सबसे पहले, न्यायालय ने कहा कि

डीपफेक साइबर क्राइम व कानून आइटी एक्ट और भारतीय दंड संहिता, 1861 में इस तरह के आपराधिक कृत्य में शामिल अपराधियों के विरुद्ध मुकदमा चलाने के लिए कई प्रविधान हैं। आइटी एक्ट के सेक्शन 67 और 67ए के तहत अश्लील या कामुकता व्यक्त करने वाले कंटेंट को प्रकाशित या प्रसारित करना दंडनीय अपराध है। अगर

• SARFAESI ACT Section 13(2) Corporate Debtor was not doing any business Licence for running the factory had lapsed and not renewed for several years No insurance of the factory premises since several years Municipal tax not paid by the Corporate Debtor Even during CIRP the factory was non operational Factory plant was very old

Narinder Singh & Ors vs State Of Punjab & Anr on 27 March, 2014 Showing the contexts in which 307 ipc doctypes: judgments appears in the document Change context size  Current  2. Leave granted. 3. We have heard counsel for the parties at length. 4. It may be stated at the outset that the petitioners herein, who

Vijay Vs. Union of India & Ors. [Civil Appeal No. 4910 of 2023] Sanjay Karol J. 1. The issues that arise for consideration of this Court in the present appeal are: 1.1 Whether the bar of admissibility created by Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act 18991 applies to the agreement(s) to sell dated 04.02.1988

Happy • Order 7 Rule 11 CPC Rejection of plaint Dispute pending before this Court is not between the same parties and the pendency of the said case would not bar the instant suit. Further, it has been held that an earlier suit between the same parties was withdrawn before the Lok Adalat and there