Uncategorized

धारा 143ए एनआई अधिनियम | चेक अनादरण मामलों में अंतरिम मुआवजा अनिवार्य नहीं है: सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने व्यापक मानदंड तय किए सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने शुक्रवार (15 मार्च) को कहा कि परक्राम्य लिखत अधिनियम के तहत केवल चेक अनादरण की शिकायत दर्ज करने से शिकायतकर्ता को एनआई अधिनियम की धारा 143 ए (1) के तहत अंतरिम […]

LEGAL UPDATE.. धारा 143ए एनआई अधिनियम | चेक अनादरण मामलों में अंतरिम मुआवजा अनिवार्य नहीं है: सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने व्यापक मानदंड तय किए सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने शुक्रवार (15 मार्च) को कहा कि परक्राम्य लिखत अधिनियम के तहत केवल चेक अनादरण की शिकायत दर्ज करने से शिकायतकर्ता को एनआई अधिनियम की धारा 143 ए (1) के

Recently, the Supreme Court observed that the mere filing of an anticipatory bail application by the accused could not be treated as his appearance before the court which had initiated proceedings under Section 82/83 Cr.P.C. against the accused. “We are in full agreement with the view taken by the Gujarat High Court that filing of

Deductions Towards PF Contributions, LIC Premium, House Rent Recovery Etc. From Salary Cannot Be Considered For Assessing Maintenance Amount U/S 125 Cr.P.C: Karnataka HC The Karnataka High Court ruled that the deductions towards PF contributions, house rent/furniture recovery, LIC premium etc. from salary cannot be considered for assessing the maintenance amount under section 125 Cr.P.C.

Periyasamy Vs. The State represented by Inspector of Police [Criminal Appeal No. 270 of 2019] [Criminal Appeal No. 271 of 2019] Sanjay Karol J. 1. The present appeals arise from the final judgment and order dated 26th November 2014 passed by the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, in Crl. A. (MD) No. 238 and 240

2017(4) Kar. L.J. 366IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD BENCH BASAVANTHAPPA AND OTHERSVERSESBASAVANNEPPA (SINCE DECEASED) BY L.RS AND OTHERS 📌HINDU MINORITY AND GUARDIANSHIP ACT, 1956, Section 8- Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, Section 29 – Embargo on transferring minor’s interest Requirement of Court’s permission Held, the property here means definite property of minor

Money recovery suit is not a commercial dispute unless building is used for commercial purpose. Every dispute of money recovery cannot be termed as a commercial dispute. Velayutharan vs M/s EMAAR MGF

2017(4) Kar. L.J. 137IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU H. ANANDA MURTHYVERSESSHREEKANTACHAR 📌KARNATAKA STAMP ACT, 1957, Sections 17 and 34 Registration Act, 1908, Section 49 Karnataka Small Cause Courts Act, 1964, Section 18 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order VIII, Rule 1-A read with Section 151 Trial Court permitting production of a document