Appellants holding various agreements cannot make independent claims against Society or its affiliates once prior developers rights have been lawfully terminated under Development Agreement.
Circular from an administrative department does not constitute law simply because it was issued by a government officer.
Evidence presented by Plaintiff was inadequate to prove joint cultivation of property by sisters hence, decisions made by Trial Court and first Appellate Court were quashed, leading to dismissal of Regular Civil Suit.
Defendant, significantly contributing to flats purchase and loan repayment, was true owner hence, Appellate Courts findings regarding Defendants acquisition of flat were deemed credible and did not require revision.
Death occurred while on duty is incorrect, as there is no proven connection between death and employment under Section 3 of Act therefore, findings are set aside and claim is dismissed.
Absence of ad idem agreement on this issue indicates that execution of Development Agreement cannot be regarded as a mere formality consequently, Developer has not sufficiently demonstrated a case for protective relief under Section 9 of Act.
Despite Marines dissatisfaction with the outcome, their alternative interpretation of evidence does not render Impugned Award invalid under Section 34 of Act.
Order against Petitioner is deemed illegal due to lack of due process in disciplinary proceedings leading to her suspension hence, Petitioner would be entitled for remainder portion of her salary from date on which suspension order was served upon her until today, by treating her ‘on duty’.
Impugned order lacked reasoning, which is crucial for fairness and judicial review and unreasoned order cannot uphold legal standards, justifying withdrawal based on unspecified complaints does not rectify original flaws in order.
Former Chief Justice of High Court is appointed as Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon disputes and differences between parties arising out of and in connection with Mortgage Deeds and in terms of arbitration clause-agreement contained.
Offering of a lower post instead of a clerk position contradicts guidelines, as does the managements reliance on past allegations and delays hence, Petitioner is entitled to clerk position, deeming managements rejection arbitrary and unsustainable.
If sale instance is of period of one year and more prior to acquisition of land, addition to consideration is required to be given.
Pension is not a matter of charity or discretion, it is a legal right to which the employee is entitled on account of his long and dedicated service.
Decision to conduct fresh inquiry was deemed unjustifiable, as Corporation did not adequately address evidence or conclusions from initial inquiry, rendering second inquiry impermissible by law.
Appellants are entitled to recover compensation of Rs. 2,90,400/- towards pecuniary loss from Respondents jointly and severally and order passed by Tribunal under other heads stands confirmed.
Legal heirs of deceased, particularly of tribal community, are entitled for equal share in suit property.
Respondent accepted quarterly installments for over two years and no specific repayment dates were established in agreement therefore, assertion for a lump sum collection is unsupported and charging interest is improper due to lack of specified due dates, indicating no breach by Petitioner.
Impugned order has been passed without jurisdiction hence, set aside directing Respondent to forthwith restore affiliation and recognition of Petitioner schools under Government Resolution.
As Trial Court neglected to determine issue which is crucial and restricts sale of agricultural land to non-agriculturists, but does provide exceptions, justifying remand of matter to trial court.
After excluding 28 days for obtaining certified copy, appeal remains 8 days late, indicating a clear error in Appellate Courts jurisdiction in condoning delay in filing appeal.
Tap the button below to open the PDF in your device's default viewer