Authorised Officer, Indian Overseas Bank and Another Vs M/s. Ashok Saw Mill-16/07/2009-Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002—Sections 13 and 17—Enforcement of security interest—Jurisdiction of DRT with regard to post 13(4) events—DRT is entitled to question the action taken by secured creditor and transactions entered into by virtue of Section 13(4)—DRT has been vested with authority to even set aside a transaction including sale and to restore possession to borrower in appropriate cases—DRT has jurisdiction to deal with a post 13(4) situation—Action taken by a secured creditor in terms of Section 13(4) is open to scrutiny and cannot only be set aside but even status quo ante can be restored by DRT.
Kale and others VS Deputy Director of Consolidation and others- 21/01/1976-FAMILY SETTLEMENT-the family settlement arrived at by the parties was oral, and the petition filed by them on August 7, 1956 before the Assistant Commissioner was merely an information of an already completed oral transaction. In other words, the petition was only an intimation to the Revenue court or authority that the matters in dispute between the parties had been settled amicably between the members of the family, and no longer required determination and that the mutation be effected in accordance with that antecedent family settlement. Since the petition did not itself create or declare any rights in immovable property of the value of Rupees 100 or upwards, it was not hit by Sec. 17 (1) (b) of the Registration Act, and as such was not compulsorily registrable.
KRISHNA PRASAD VERMA (D) THR. LRS. VS STATE OF BIHAR & ORS 26/09/2019-We are in no manner indicating that if a judicial officer passes a wrong order, then no action is to be taken. In case a judicial officer passes orders which are against settled legal norms but there is no allegation of any extraneous influences leading to the passing of such orders then the appropriate action which the High Court should take is to record such material on the administrative side and place it on the service record of the judicial officer concerned.
Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi Vs State of Uttar Pradesh and others-20/09/1990-This was done in spite of the clear provisions in the L. R. Manual laying down detailed procedure for appointment, termination and renewal of tenure and the requirement to first consider the existing incumbent for renewal of his tenure and to take steps for a fresh appointment in his place only if the existing incumbent is not found suitable in comparison to more suitable persons available for appointment at the time of renewal
M/s. Julien Educational Trust Vs Sourendra Kumar Roy and ors-02/12/2009-Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order 39, Rules 1 and 2—Injunction-Prima facie case made out by appellant-Trust as to agreement for sale, which has to go to trial—Whether there was a concluded contract or not between appellant-Trust and the respondents is a matter of evidence and can only be gone into during trial of suit—Interim order is required to be passed to maintain status quo of suit property—Prima facie case is in favour of appellant-Trust
Om Prakash Vs. Suresh Kumar-30/01/2020-The principal argument of the appellant is that the statement made by his counsel before the High Court was not binding on him, as it was made without his instructions.We hasten to add neither the client nor the court is bound by the lawyer's statements or admissions as to matters of law or legal conclusions. Thus, according to generally accepted notions of professional responsibility, lawyers should follow the client's instructions rather than substitute their judgment for that of the client. We may add that in some cases, lawyers can make decisions without consulting the client.
P. Lakshmi Reddy Vs L. Lakshmi Reddy-05/12/1956-Limitation Act, 1963—Articles 64 and 65—Adverse possession—Co-owner—Permissibility—Sole possession by one co-owner is not sufficient—There must be open assertion of hostile title against the other.
Shiv Cotex Vs Tirgun Auto Plast P. Ltd. and Others-30/08/2011-SECOND APPEAL-It is, open to the High Court to reframe substantial question of law or frame substantial question of law afresh or hold that No. substantial question of law is involved at the time of hearing the second appeal but reversal of the judgment and decree passed in appeal by a court subordinate to it in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 100 of the Code is impermissible without formulating substantial question of law and a decision on such question.
Smt. Asha Devi Vs Dukhi Sao and another-08/08/1974-Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Section 100 and 101—Appeal—Letters Patent Appeal—Scope of—A Division Bench hearing appeal against the Judgment of single Judge is not limited to question of law as in case of Second Appeal but whole matter is open in respect of both questions of law as well as fact.
State of U.P. and another Vs Johri Mal-21/04/2004-The age old tradition on the part of the States in appointing the District Government counsel on the basis of the recommendations of the District Collector in consultation with the District Judge is based on certain principles. Whereas the District Judge is supposed to know the merit, competence and capability of the concerned lawyers for discharging their duties, the District Magistrate is supposed to know their conduct outside the Court vis-a-vis the victims of offences, public officers, witnesses etc. The District Magistrate is also supposed to know about the conduct of the Government counsel as also their integrity.
The applicant shall be a student of a Law School/University recognised by the Bar ouncil of India. The applicant should have completed at least 3 years of the 5-year LLB course or 2 years of the 3-year LLB course.
ADVERTISEMENT HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA District Judge (Entry Level), Direct From Bar Exam-2020 Advertisement No. BSJS/1/2020 Applications are invited from eligible Advocates forContinue Reading
In respect of all term loans (including agricultural term loans, retail and crop loans), all commercial banks (including regional rural banks, small finance banks and local area banks), co-operative banks, all-India Financial Institutions, and NBFCs (including housing finance companies) (“lending institutions”) are permitted to grant a moratorium of three months on payment of all instalments1 falling due between March 1, 2020 and May 31, 2020.
Though we pull out of the NPT, we have no intention to produce nuclear weapons and our nuclear activities at this stage will be confined only to peaceful purposes such as the production of electricity. If the U. S. drops its hostile policy to stifle the DPRK and stops its nuclear threat to the DPRK, the DPRK may prove through a separate verification process between the DPRK and the U.S. that it does not make any nuclear weapon.
The Policy seeks to achieve its objectives, by efficient utilisation of existing resources. We have to operate by remaining within the given legal/procedural framework. The laws are indeed time-tested.
1. Application of Technology in the Judicial Adjudication
2. Medical Negligence and Consumer Protection: Need for expanding the Role of Judiciary
3. Judicial Trend in Cases relating to Cyber Crime
4. Judicial Methods-Current approach
5. Court and Case Management: Managing the Docket
This Directive concerns the legal protection of databases in any form. For the purposes of this Directive, ‘database’ shall mean a collection of independent works, data or other materials arranged in a systematic or methodical way and individually accessible by electronic or other means.
Any right to privacy must encompass and protect the personal intimacies of the home, the family, marriage, motherhood, procreation and child rearing. This catalogue approach to the question is obviously not as instructive as it does not give analytical picture of the distinctive characteristics of the right of privacy.
The conduct of Mr. Adhikary, apart from being abominable, prima facie amounts to ‘criminal contempt’ within the meaning of section 2(c) of the Contempt of Court’s Act, 1971. Therefore, I have no other option but issue a suomotu Rule for contempt against Mr. Adhikary.
Parole leave is recognized as a statutory right as per Rule 19 of the Maharashtra Prisons (Mumbai Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Rules of 1959’ for short) and the convicts are entitled for parole leave, if the circumstances as referred in Rule 19 exist.
The writ petition has only added substance to the requirement of an in-depth investigation. The Court is therefore in requirement of a verifiable independent expert opinion on the results of the investigation collected so far.
A bank which gives a performance guarantee must honour that guarantee according to its terms. It is not concerned in the least with the relations between the supplier and the customer: nor with question whether the supplier has performed his contractual obligation or not; nor with the question whether supplier is in default or not.