Digi - Legal Insights
PROPERTY LAW
Details
Plaintiffs' request for an injunction is supported by their prima facie case and balance of convenience, as Defendants did not challenge Plaintiffs' claims.
ARBITRATION
Details
Appellants failure to object in timely manner, combined with its active participation in arbitration process, resulted in a waiver of its rights to challenge tribunals constitution, as mandated by Section 16(2) of Act.
PROPERTY LAW
Details
Allegations of bias favoring sugar factory owners were unsubstantiated and Court reiterated limited scope of judicial review in infrastructure matters, emphasizing necessity of maintaining public projects without interference in their decision-making processes.
PROPERTY LAW
Details
Appellant No. 1 has repeatedly violated Court orders by refusing to vacate Flat No. 702, undermining Respondent No. 5s rights hence, no interference with impugned order passed by Single Judge.
CIVIL LAW
Details
Need for correction is justified due to Petitioners service in C.R.P.F., where accurate records are necessary for pension benefits.
PROPERTY LAW
Details
Validity of Petitioners application cannot be dismissed in light of a subsequent proposal from promoter claiming majority support, especially since that claim is disputed with allegations of misrepresentation.
CIVIL LAW
Details
Sons have established a case warranting intervention to quash Impugned Order due to jurisdictional fact against Father, which remains unchallenged.
CIVIL LAW
Details
Petitioner is entitled to receive information free of charge hence, impugned order was quashed and PIO was mandated to furnish requested information within one week.
SERVICE LAW
Details
Refusal to approve Petitioners appointment based on Education Officers order from August 9, 2021, was found unsustainable, necessitating a modification of that approval order.
SERVICE LAW
Details
Time bound promotion Scheme aims to alleviate employee stagnation by offering higher pay-scale without actual promotion, exemplified by Petitioners receiving a higher pay-scale upon absorption as CEA.
CIVIL LAW
Details
Executing Court was criticized for not providing detailed reasons for its decisions and application of Order 21 Rule 99 of CPC by Respondents was deemed an abuse of legal process hence, substantial questions of law posed were found in favor of Appellants, making impugned order unsustainable.
PROPERTY LAW
Details
Court rejected continuation of interim relief but mandated that authorities must comply with statutory requirements during possession proceedings.
CIVIL LAW
Details
Regulation 6(g) of Regulations aims to ensure that medical colleges remain accessible and do not become monopolized by wealth, a goal consistent with N.M.C. Acts objectives hence, Regulation 6(g) is deemed valid and no declaration of its invalidity or any consequential relief can be granted.
SERVICE LAW
Details
Tribunals assertion that Petitioner should have obtained certificate by application date was deemed erroneous hence, MPSC is instructed to conduct an interview with Petitioner, facilitating her participation in selection process.
RENT CONTROL
Details
Application filed by Petitioners in 2005 under Section 84 of Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act was deemed inadmissible since original tenant's heirs did not pursue recovery of possession.
CIVIL LAW
Details
Petitioner Janhavi, who is daughter of present Petitioner, has filed an additional affidavit confirming their relationship during pendency of SLP hence, Respondent-Scrutiny Committee is directed to issue validity certificate to Petitioner as belonging to Hindu Thakar Scheduled Tribe.
PROPERTY LAW
Details
Regulatory measures that influence market conditions do not justify invalidating legislation under constitutional grounds, as amendments comply with statutory frameworks and do not impose taxes or extraneous premiums.
CIVIL LAW
Details
Appellants action of storing does not constitute a "manufacturing process" as defined by Section 2(k) of Factories Act, 1948.
SERVICE LAW
Details
Bond is irrelevant to Petitioners entitlement to salary from appointment date until approval and there is no record of Petitioner executing such a bond thus, any restriction on salary payments based on this bond is unfounded.
CIVIL LAW
Details
Trial Courts mistake in allowing impleadment of Petitioners in a suit regarding TDR is highlighted, asserting that Plaintiffs cannot entangle unrelated properties in their claims hence, Courts order must be modified to remove impleadment of Petitioners from suit.