admin_nupur

AIR 2007 SUPREME COURT 1133(From: 2006 (5) AIR Bom R 405:2006 Cri LJ (NOC) 456) Criminal Appeal Nos. 183 and 184 of 2007 (arising out of SLP (Cri.) Nos. 4600 and 4603 of 2006),D/ 9-1-2007. Dattatray Krishnaji Ghule v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.ANDHitendra Manohar Vichare v. State of Maharashtra. Criminal P. C. (2 of […]

AIR 2007 SUPREME COURT 1160(From: Madras)* Civil Appeal No. 6196 of 2000, D/18-1-2007. Krishnananda v. Kattu Siva Ashram & Ors. Civil P. C. (5 of 1908), S. 100-Second appeal Tenability Suit for declaration of title Appellant was one of defendants in suit Suit dismissed Appellant’s claim for title by adverse possession rejected by trial Court

÷÷÷÷÷ Legal Update ÷÷÷÷÷ 🅾️इलाहाबाद हाई कोर्ट ने एक अहम फैसला दिया है, जिसमें नाबालिग को भी पूर्व जमानत का अधिकार है। ====+====+====+====+==== 🟫किसी भी मामले में गिरफ्तारी या गिरफ्तारी की आशंका होने पर नाबालिग भी अग्रिम जमानत के लिए आवेदन कर सकता है।यह मुख्य न्यायाधीश प्रीतिंकर दिवाकर और मिश्रित समित गोपाल की खंडपीठ ने

Divorce. Derogatory remarks in WS by wife against husband amounts to cruelty. Derogatory remarks in WSa conscious and deliberate statement levelled with pungency and that too placed on record, through the written statement, cannot be so lightly ignored or brushed aside. In Vijaykumar Ramchandra Bhate v. Neela Vijaykumar Bhate [MANU/SC/0316/2003 : (2003) 6 SCC 334

Case law Sec. 80— Sec. 80, though a procedural provision, has been held to be mandatory as it is conceived in public interest, the public purpose underlying it being the advancement of justice by giving the Government the opportunity to scrutinize and take immediate action to settle a just claim without driving the person who

धारा 18 (3) जेजे एक्ट | मजिस्ट्रेट के पास आरोपी को किशोर घोषित करने के बाद फ़ाइल को अपने पास रखने या ट्रायल की कोई शक्ति नहीं है: इलाहाबाद हाईकोर्ट 🔘 इलाहाबाद हाईकोर्ट ने बुधवार को कहा कि आरोपी को नाबालिग घोषित करने के बाद मजिस्ट्रेट के पास फाइल को अपने पास रखने का अधिकार

Section 85 CRPC Accused absconding and property attached After appearance of the accused, the entire proceedings to secure his presence of trial came to an end and in such cases, hairsplitting technicalities shall not stand in the way of getting the attachment released and the Court is duty bound to release the attachment – Therefore,