Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“It appears that a deliberate attempt has been made to demean the functioning of the Court by filing this application by conflating two entirely different issues, though an alternative approach is available.”
“The affidavit raising the preliminary objection stated- That as the two Judges of Larger Bench have already disagreed with the view of the earlier Division Bench, their presence in the Full Bench will be a hindrance for an independent and open mind hearing. The point of law/question of law referred to be determined cannot be fair and unbiased. That, in this premises, the view of a third Judge will be immaterial as the disagreed view of the two judges will prevail. It is just like loosing of the case by the sole respondent is preordained.”
The husband of one of the Judicial Officers alleged that she along with another Judicial Officer and Public Prosecutor violated the guidelines laid down in the Arnesh Kumar case; and that he was illegally arrested from his residence at off hours, pursuant to matrimonial matter.
In the instant matter, the State Bar Council of MP issued a communication calling on lawyers in the State to abstain from judicial work in order to protest against the High Court’s scheme mandating the disposal of 25 oldest cases every quarter.
The Court stated that when a decision of a coordinate bench of the same High Court is brought in notice, it is to be respected and is binding to the Bench of such co-equal strength. For taking a different view, it is required to refer the question to the larger bench, as it is the only course of action open to a Bench of a co-equal strength.
This public flogging took place at Undhela village in Kheda district soon after the Muslim men were arrested on charges of pelting stones on a garba event.
“The parties seeking divorce by mutual consent shall not be compelled to furnish or withdraw their consent for a decree of dissolution of marriage since the key and chief component for such a decree is free and unblemished consent.”
Allahabad High Court said that as the compensation has already been assessed by the authorities to the tune of Rs. 1,33,05,600/-, thus no question arises for interfering for awarding higher compensation
Judicial Officers were given a show-cause notice by the Gujarat High Court for not following the Court’s orders and directions
Madras High Court held that the contempt petition is not maintainable and barred by limitation. Thus, dismissed contempt proceedings against the presiding officer of Family Court as he was not the presiding officer when the order was passed.
Gujarat High Court’s Full Court rejects Yatin Oza’s apology and denied to re-confer him Senior Designation. On 21-07-2020, Senior Advocate Yatin Oza
by Vikramaditya, Practicing Advocate at Delhi
Madras High Court: N. Anand Venkatesh, J., stated that in case the Schools are violating the High Court’s earlier Order with regard to
Manipur High Court: A Division Bench of Lanusungkum Jamir and Kh. Nobin Singh, JJ., initiated contempt proceedings, wherein Additional Superintendent of Police is
Jammu & Kashmir High Court: Sanjeev Kumar, J., closed a contempt petition seeking to initiate proceedings against respondents for non-compliance with the
Pumping for apparently misplaced political propaganda has no place in our courts; this unhealthy practice needs to be strongly deprecated. — Madan
Supreme Court: Reacting upon the judicial orders passed by Justice C.S. Karnan against the Chief Justice of India and 7 Supreme Court
Supreme Court: Due to non-appearance of Justice C.S. Karnan before the Court in the contempt proceedings initiated against him, the 7-judge bench
Supreme Court: The 7-Judge Bench of Jagdish Singh Khehar, CJ and six senior most Judges of the Supreme Court, Dipak Misra, J.