Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
When the Court requested the advocate to remove her face cover, she asserted that a woman advocate can appear with her face covered and claimed the same as her fundamental right.
The Court noted that the appellate authority formed under BPCL’s Policy remedy would have comprised of their officers, and the same could not be permitted as BPCL could not be a judge in their own cause.
There is nothing to show that there is any inconsistency or repugnancy between the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 and arbitration as an alternative. The parties have agreed to arbitration clause provided in contract agreement for settlement of disputes including the issue raised by petitioners.
Rajasthan High Court decided to entertain the appeal due to the significant question of the application’s maintainability.
“The Single judge directed IOCL to deliver peaceful vacant possession of the premises to the appellants upon removal of the structures therein. Further, directed it to pay arrears of market rent to the appellants in respect of the plot from 1-07-1995 till the date of delivery of possession in favour of the appellants”
The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that alternative remedy is not absolute bar for examining conditions to issue reassessment notice and admitted the petitions for the final hearing.
The DSG Management Committee and the GHPS Society are formed and governed by the DSG Act, a central piece of legislation, which has no provision for conducting an audit by the CAG.
The Supreme Court observed that availability of an alternative remedy does not operate as an absolute bar to the “maintainability” of a writ petition and that the rule, which requires a party to pursue the alternative remedy provided by a statute, is a rule of policy, convenience and discretion rather than a rule of law.
Orissa High Court: A Division Bench of SK Sahoo and M S Raman, JJ. disposed of the petition leaving the petitioner with
Chhattisgarh High Court: Sam Koshy J. partly allowed the petition and partly disposed of the petition expressing no opinion on the termination
Karnataka High Court: B. Veerappa, J. while disposing of this petition directed that the impugned order should not be given effect to.
South Africa High Court, Eastern Cape Local Division, Port Elizabeth: G.H. Bloem, J. while dismissing the application suggested an alternative remedy to
Jharkhand High Court: Sujit Narayan Prasad, J, dismissed the writ petition on the ground of availability of alternative remedy. In the pertinent case,
Madhya Pradesh High Court: G.S. Ahluwalia, J., dismissed a petition filed under Article 226 Constitution of India to direct the respondents to
Uttaranchal High Court: A Division Bench of Ramesh Ranganathan, CJ and Alok Kumar Verma, J. entertained a special appeal filed against the
Uttaranchal High Court: A Division Bench of Alok Singh and N.S. Dhanik, JJ. dismissed a writ petition filed by the 66-year-old petitioner,
Patna High Court: The Bench of Madhuresh Prasad, J., allowed the writ petition which was filed against the act of arbitrary stoppage
Meghalaya High Court: This petition was filed before a Single Judge Bench comprising of Mohammad Yaqoob Mir, CJ, under Article 227 of