IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION)

Save this PDF as:
 WORD  PNG  TXT  JPG

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION)"

Transcription

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA S/o Sh.Prabhu Dayal Sukhija R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi PETITIONER VERSUS 1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi. 2. Bar Council of India, Through its Chairman, 21, Rouse Avenue Institutional Area, Near Bal Bhawan, New Delhi ID: 3. University of Delhi Through The Vice Chancellor Maurice Nagar,Delhi ID: 4. Faculty of Law, Through its Dean,

2 University of Delhi, Maurice Nagar,Delhi ID: RESPONDENTS IN THE MATTER OF: WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND IN THE MATTER OF: CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF CLAUSE 5 A OF SCHEDULE III OF RULES OF LEGAL EDUCATION 2008 AS ENACTED BY BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA UNDER SECTIONS 7(1)(h) AND (i), 24(1)(c)(iii), AND (iiia), 49(1)(af),(ag), AND (d) OF THE ADVOCATES ACT, 1961; AND IN THE MATTER OF: VIOLATION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AS GUARANTEED TO THE PETITIONER UNDER ARTICLES 14 AND 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA; AND WRIT PETITION IN THE NATURE OF PUBLIC INTREST LITIGATION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SEEKING INDULGENCE OF THIS HON BLE COURT TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE MANDAMUS AND/OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT/DIRECTION/ORDER THEREBY DIRECTING RESPONDENTS TO ADMIT 2310 STUDENTS IN LAW FACULTY, DELHI UNIVERSITY

3 To The Hon ble Chief Justice And His Companion Judges Delhi High Court,New Delhi Most Respectfully Showeth : THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE PETITIONER IS AS UDNER: 1. That the Petitioner is a bonafide citizen of India and is invoking extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Hon ble Court for the public interest as he does not have any personal interest involve in the present litigation. It is stated that the present petition is not guided by self gain or for gain to any other person/institution/body. It is stated that the Petitioner has no motive other than of Public Interest in filing the present Writ Petition. 2. That the Petitioner has come to know about the facts stated in the present petition after reading and watching news in media and also through information available on Television, newspapers, internet etc. The Petitioner has filed representations in this regard, however the Respondents are not responding. 3. That the present Writ Petition has been filed for the benefit of large number of citizens who have suffered due to wrong policy of admissions adopted by the Colleges affiliated with the Respondent No.3. It is humbly submitted that all such persons are not able to approach this Hon ble Court to seek the relief claimed in the present petition, as most of them are students. That the present petition, as per the knowledge of the Petitioner shall not adversely affect any person/body/institution. 4. That the Petitioner is a law graduate from Campus Law Center, Delhi University and Lawyer/Advocate by profession having great interest in the Social Issues. It is stated that the Petitioner has the means to pay the cost, if any, imposed by this Hon ble Court.

4 5. That before filing the present Petition, the Petitioner filed representations with the Respondents through s, however has not received any response from Respondents. The representation was mailed on Copies thereof is annexed as ANNEXURE P-1 (Colly). 6. That the Petitioner has previously filed a Public Interest Litigation bearing petition no. W.P (C) 7871/2016 and W.P (C) 4581/2017, both are pending adjudication before this Hon ble Court. 7. That the Respondent No.1 is engaged in bringing world class opportunities of higher education and research to the student of India and is engaged in formulating the National Policy on Education and to ensure that it is implemented in letter and spirit 8. That the Respondent No.2 is a statutory body created by Parliament to regulate and represent the Indian bar. It performs the regulatory function by prescribing standards of professional conduct and etiquette and by exercising disciplinary jurisdiction over the bar. It also sets standards for legal education and grants recognition to Universities whose degree in law will serve as qualification for enrolment as an advocate. 9. That the Respondent No.3 is central university financed by public funds, the Respondent No.4, Faculty of Law has been a leader in the field of legal education in India since its inception in 1924 and continues to be so till date. With the demand for increase in the number of students to be admitted in the Law Faculty, Law Centre- I was established in 1970, Law Centre-II in 1971, and Campus Law Centre in That the Petitioner was shocked to read a News item on in Indian Express news paper that the Respondent No.2, has imposed a condition this year that the Respondent No. 4, Law Faculty cannot admit more than 1,440 students in all its three centres though in all previous years the Law Faculty had been admitting 2310 students. A copy of the news downloaded from internet is annexed as ANNEXURE P-2.

5 11. That as per information available on the Website of Respondent No.3 has invited applications from eligible candidates to fill 126 vacant positions in Respondent No.4, Law faculty, a copy of information available on website is annexed as ANNEXURE P That the Respondent No.2 may impose condition to decrease strength of each law center of Respondent No.4 by invoking provisions contained in clause 5A of Schedule III of the Legal Education Rules,2008, a copy of Legal Education Rules,2008 is annexed as ANNEXURE P-4. The clause 5 A reads as under:- 5A. Size of a section : The Inspection Committee may approve for admission in each of the section of a class for not more than 60 students and may allow a minimum of two sections in each class but not more than five sections in one class (such as First Year or Second Year or Third Year, etc) as the case may be unless there is any exceptional reason for granting more sections in a Class, such a reason has to be specified by the inspection Committee That the provisions of clause 5 A of Schedule III of the Legal Education Rules,2008, herein after refered to as the impugned clause, are wrongly applied in present case as the strength of permissible admissions in each centre of Law Faculty, University of Delhi was decided much prior to the enactment of the Legal Education Rules, The provisions of clause 5 A of Schedule III of the Legal Education Rules,2008 are infringing fundamental rights of citizens seeking admission in Respondent No.4, hence are assailed as unconstitutional in present petition. 14. That the Respondent No.3 and 4 are public funded educational institutions receiving grants from University Grants Commission and by reducing number of admissions the public money is not put on optimum use.the objective of establishing public funded educational institutions is to provide an opportunity for higher education to a large number of students. It is worthwhile to note

6 here that spread of Legal Education is need of the hour and is a pious duty of the State. 15. That a large number of student shall suffer if the number of permissible admissions in LL.B. course at the Respondent No. 4 are decreased and it will infringe their legal and Fundamental right to have higher education of their choice. 16. The funds provided to the Delhi University from the money collected from Tax payer, thus it is necessary that it is put to optimum use. The same infrastructure of Law Faculty had been catering 2310 students for more than four decades, then it is not understandable to decrease the number of admissions. 17. That as a large number of students aspire to attain their education from the Respondent No.3 and 4 and their right has been tried to be curtailed by decreasing number of admissions in the Respondent No. 4, the petitioner immediately on sent a representation to the Respondents, however till date they have not responded. 18. That the indulgence of this Hon ble Court is sought to issue appropriate writ, inter-alia, on the following grounds:- GROUNDS. A. Because the impugned Clause is ultra virus to the fundamental rights as enshrined in Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. B. Because the impugned Clause infringes citizen s Right to Education, it is humbly submitted that to attain higher education is part of Right to Life, thus the impugned Clause is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the restriction placed by the impugned clause to admit only upto 300 students in a law College is totally unreasonable and violates Constitution of India. C. Because the Students/citizens have a fundamental right to have equal opportunity to achieve higher education and to study course of their choice and the restriction placed by the impugned clause

7 does not have any intelligible diffrentia, thus is totally unreasonable, discriminatory and arbitrary. D. Because the restriction placed by the impugned clause is neither in the nature of professional standardization nor in the nature of technical standardization, thus the same is un-constitutional and ultra virus. E. Because the impugned Clause is violating the parent Act i.e. the Advocates Act,1961. It is submitted that Section 7(h) and 7(i) of the Advocate Act 1961 mandates promotion of legal education and to lay down standards of such education and recognition of University. The relevant section 7(h) and 7(i) are reproduced as under: S-7 (h)- To promote legal education and to lay down standards of such education in consultation with the Universities in India, imparting such education and the State Bar Councils ; S- 7 (i) To recognize Universities whose degree in law shall be a qualification for enrolment as an advocate and for that purpose to visit and inspect Universities or cause the State Bar Councils to visit and inspect Universities in accordance with such directions as it may give in this behalf ; The aforesaid provisions seek promotion of Legal Education, thus by putting restriction to admit students upto permitted strength the objective to promote legal education defeats. It is pertinent to note here that none of the provisions of the enabling law Advocate Act 1961 provides such a limitation on the number of admissible students in a center of legal education. F. Because the impugned clause is beyond the scope of rule makinpower entrusted by the Advocates Act G. Because the impugned Clause infringes the Public Policy as well as Educational Policy, as these envisage education and equal opportunity at all age levels and at the pace suited to them, the same cannot be restricted by a rule making body to the detriment of

8 and without the backup/ express provision provided by the Statutory laws. The role of Bar Council of India is to ensure minimum infrastructural requirement which includes building infrastructure like number of class rooms, availability of teachers, library facilities etc., however the strength of admissible students must be exclusive domain of concerned institution. H. Because reducing number of admissible students from 2310 to 1440, the Respondents are infringing fundamental rights of students aspiring to attain admission in the Respondent No.4 to study LL.B. It is submitted action of reducing admissible students violates Right to life as enshrined under Article 21 of Constitution of India. The said action also defeats basic principles of the Constitution of India. I. Because reducing number of admissible students from 2310 to 1440 defeats the objective of establishing the Respondent No.3 and 4. J. Because reducing number of admissible students from 2310 to 1440 is arbitrary and discriminatory and amounts to wastage of public money. It is stated that the Respondent No.3 and 4 are public funded educational institutions receiving grants from University Grants Commission and by reducing number of admissions the public money is not put on optimum use.the objective of establishing public funded educational institutions is to provide an opportunity for higher education to a large number of students. It is worthwhile to note here that spread of Legal Education is need of the hour and is a pious duty of the State. K. Because by reducing number of admissible students from 2310 to 1440 in the Respondent No. 4, a large number of student shall suffer and it will infringe their legal and Fundamental right to have higher education of their choice. L. Because the funds provided to the Respondent No. 3 and 4 from the

9 money collected from Tax payer, thus it is necessary that it is put to optimum use. The same infrastructure of Respondent No. 4 had been catering 2310 students for more than four decades, then by reducing number of admissions the infrastructure shall be wasted. M. Because there are only a few institutions which offer 3 year LL.B. Course and among them the Respondent No. 4 is the best and more particularly this is only institute in Delhi providing 3 year LL.B. Course after graduation. The Respondent No. 2 has prohibited lateral entry in 5 year LL.B. course for students seeking admission in Law Course after their graduation, thus by reducing number of permissible admissions in the Respondent No. 4, the respondents are infringing students fundamental right. N. Because by reducing number of admissible students from 2310 to 1440 in the Respondent No. 4 will cause not only economic effect on the citizen but also has prevent them from attaining higher education. 19. That the Petitioner seeks liberty from your Lordships to add and /or delete and/or amend any of the grounds during the submissions before this Hon ble Court. 20. That the Petitioner has not filed any other Petition before this Hon ble Court and/or Hon ble Supreme Court of India seeking same or similar relief. 21. That this Hon ble Court has got the jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present petition as the impugned infringement has taken place within the jurisdiction of this Hon ble Court. PRAYER In the light of the facts and circumstances, it is, therefore, most humbly prayed that this Hon ble Court may be pleased to:

10 (i) (ii) (iii) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ/direction/order thereby Striking down Clause 5 A of Schedule- III of Rules of Legal Education 2008 as enacted by Bar Council of India being arbitrary, capricious and violative of fundamental rights. Directing Respondents to admit 2310 students in the Respondent No.4 and not to reduce number of admissible students. Any other relief which this Hon ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case may also be granted in favor of the Petitioner and against the Respondents. It is prayed accordingly. THROUGH New Delhi Date PETITIONER IN PERSON JOGINDER SUKHIJA R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi

11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA..PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS INDEX Sn. Particulars Page No. 1. Notice of Motion 2. Urgent Application 3. Memo of Parties 4. List of Dates and Events. 5. Public Interest Litigation Under Article 226 of Constitution of India 1950 alongwith affidavit. 6. Annexure P-1(Colly): Copy of representation mailed on Annexure P-2: Copy of news 8. Application Under Order 39 rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC on behalf of the petitioner seeking ad-interim ex-parte stay order alongwith Affidavit. 9. Application under section 151 CPC for exemption from filing legible/typed copy of certain annexures alongwith affidavit. 10. Vakalatnama PETITIONER IN PERSON JOGINDER SUKHIJA R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi Delhi Dated:

12 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA..PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS IN THE MATTER OF : MEMO OF PARTIES JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA S/o Sh.Prabhu Dayal Sukhija R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi PETITIONER VERSUS 1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi. 2. Bar Council of India, Through its Chairman, 21, Rouse Avenue Institutional Area, Near Bal Bhawan, New Delhi ID: 5. University of Delhi

13 Through The Vice Chancellor Maurice Nagar,Delhi ID: 6. Faculty of Law, Through its Dean, University of Delhi, Maurice Nagar,Delhi ID: RESPONDENTS THROUGH PETITIONER IN PERSON JOGINDER SUKHIJA R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi Delhi Dated:

14 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA..PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS NOTICE OF MOTION Sir, The enclosed petition in the aforesaid matter as being filed on behalf of the Petitioner and is likely to be listed on or any date, thereafter. Please take notice accordingly. THROUGH PETITIONER IN PERSON JOGINDER SUKHIJA R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi Delhi Dated:

15 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA..PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS URGENT APPLICATION Kindly treat this accompanying petition as an urgent one in accordance with the High Court Rules and orders as the Petitioner is seeking amendment of the impugned policy. THROUGH PETITIONER IN PERSON JOGINDER SUKHIJA R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi Delhi Dated:

16 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA..PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 READ WITH SECTION 151 CPC ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER SEEKING AD-INTERIM DIRECTION. MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: 1. That the Petitioner has filed the accompanying Public Interest Litigation under Article 226 of Constitution of India. The contents of the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity and may be read with part and parcel of this application. 2. That the need of the hour is granting education to maximum students using the public money to enhance education amongst youth of the country. 3. That there exists prima-facie case in favour of the Petitioner as the same is in interest of public at large. 4. That the Public at large shall suffer irreparable loss and injury in case the interim order as prayed is not granted in its favour. PRAYER: It is, therefore humbly prayed that Your Lordships may kindly be pleased to

17 (A) Pass an ad-interim ex-parte order thereby directing Respondents to admit 2310 students in the Respondent No.4 and not to reduce number of admissible students; Or (B) Any other order as this Hon ble court deems fit It is prayed accordingly. THROUGH PETITIONER IN PERSON JOGINDER SUKHIJA R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi Delhi Dated: IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF :

18 JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA UNION OF INDIA & ORS. VERSUS..PETITIONER RESPONDENTS APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING THE LEGIBLE/TYPED/CERTIFIED COPIES OF DOCUMENTS, ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER. MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: - 1. That the Petitioner has filed the accompanying Public Interest Litigation under Article 226 of Constitution of India. The contents of the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity and may be read with part and parcel of this application. 2. That the petitioner also despite best effort has not been able to get legible copies of the some documents. 3. That in view of the same present application is being moved praying that the Hon ble Court may exempt the petitioner from filing the legible copies of certain documents. 4. That the present application is bonafide and may be allowed in the interest of justice. PRAYER: In the facts and circumstances submitted herein above, it is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon ble Court in the interest of justice may be pleased to: A. Petitioner may be exempted from filing the legible/typed/certified copies of certain documents.

19 B. Pass such other or further orders, as this Hon ble Court may deem fit and proper on the facts and circumstances of the present case in favour of the petitioner. It is prayed accordingly. THROUGH PETITIONER IN PERSON JOGINDER SUKHIJA R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi Delhi Dated: IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA..PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS Affidavit I, Joginder Sukhija, s/o. Prabhu Dayal, age about years, R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi , do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under:

20 1. That I am the Petitioner in the above state matter and being well conversant with the facts of the case is as such competent to depose and swear the present affidavit. 2. That I have gone through the contents of the accompanying Application and the contents of the same are correct to my knowledge and as per records, the same has been drafted by my counsel under my instruction. Deponent Verification: I, the above named deponent do hereby verify that the contents of the above affidavit are true to my knowledge and no part of it is false and nothing material has been kept concealed therefrom. Verified at New Delhi on this day of May Deponent IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA..PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS Affidavit I, Joginder Sukhija, s/o. Prabhu Dayal, age about years, R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi , do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under: 1. That I am the Petitioner in the above state matter and being well conversant with the facts of the case is as such competent to depose and swear the present affidavit. 2. That I have gone through the contents of the accompanying Application and the contents of the same are correct to my

21 knowledge and as per records, the same has been drafted by my counsel under my instruction. Deponent Verification: I, the above named deponent do hereby verify that the contents of the above affidavit are true to my knowledge and no part of it is false and nothing material has been kept concealed therefrom. Verified at New Delhi on this day of May Deponent

22 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA..PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS Affidavit I, Joginder Sukhija, s/o. Prabhu Dayal, age about years, R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi , do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under: 1. That I am the Petitioner in the above state matter and being well conversant with the facts of the case is as such competent to depose and swear the present affidavit. 2. That I have filed the present petition as Public Interest Litigation. 3. That I have gone through the High Court (public Interest Litigation) Rules, 2010 and do hereby affirm that the present Public Interest Litigation is in conformity thereof. 4. That the petitioner has no personal interest in the litigation and neither myself nor anybody who the petitioner is interested would in any manner benefit from the relief sought in the present petition save as the member of general public. The petition is not guided by self gain or gain of any person, institution, body or there is no motive other than of public interest in filing the present petition. 5. That I have done whatsoever enquiry/investigation which was in my power to do to collect all data/material which was relevant for this court to entertain the present petition. I further confirm that I have not concealed in the present petition any data/material/information which may have enabled this court to

23 form an opinion whether to entertain this petition or not and/or whether to grant any relief or not. 6. That the documents filed along with the petition are true copies of their originals. Deponent Verification: I, the above named deponent do hereby verify that the contents of the above affidavit are true to my knowledge and no part of it is false and nothing material has been kept concealed therefrom. Verified at New Delhi on this day of May Deponent LIST OF DATES AND EVENTS

24 1924 The Respondent no.4, Faculty of Law has been a leader in the field of legal education in India and continues to be so till date Law Centre-I was established with the demand for increase in the number of students to be admitted in the Law Faculty 1971 Law Centre-II 1975 Campus Law centre was established The Petitioner filed representations with the Respondents through s, however has not received any response from Respondents. The representation was mailed on

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com) DISTRICT : KOLKATA IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE W.P. No. (W) of 2017 In the matter of :- An application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ;

More information

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras In the High Court of Judicature at Madras (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P. No. of 2017 H. Navas Basha 24/21, Bharathidasan Street Nehru Nagar Velachery Chennai 600 042 vs 1. The Bar Council of India

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) Writ Petition (Civil) No... Of 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) Writ Petition (Civil) No... Of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) Writ Petition (Civil) No.... Of 2013 A WRIT PETITION IN PUBLIC INTEREST UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGHLIGHTING

More information

In the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi. I.A. No. of 2013 In Civil Suit Number 2439/2012. The Chancellor, Master And Scholars Of The University

In the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi. I.A. No. of 2013 In Civil Suit Number 2439/2012. The Chancellor, Master And Scholars Of The University In the Matter of: In the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi I.A. No. of 2013 In Civil Suit Number 2439/2012 The Chancellor, Master And Scholars Of The University Of Oxford And Ors... Plaintiffs Versus Rameshwari

More information

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Versus. 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? No

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Versus. 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? No *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 23 rd July, 2010. + W.P.(C) 11305/2009, CM No.10831/2009 (u/s 151 CPC for stay), CM No.9694/2010 (u/o1 Rule 10 of CPC for impleadment) & CM No.

More information

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi 110 001. No. 3/ER/2003/JS-II Dated : 27 th March, 2003 O R D E R 1. Whereas, the superintendence, direction and control, inter alia,

More information

W.P. (C) No. 45 of 2013

W.P. (C) No. 45 of 2013 IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) A I Z A W L B E N C H :: A I Z A W L W.P. (C) No. 45 of 2013 Sh. J. Vanlalchhuanga, S/o Ralkapliana R/o Ramhlun,

More information

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI. KANUBHAI M PATEL HUF - Petitioner(s) Versus

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI. KANUBHAI M PATEL HUF - Petitioner(s) Versus IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5295 of 2010 WITH SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5296 OF 2010 AND SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5297 OF 2010 HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA

More information

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com) REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3945 OF 2018 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO.35786 OF 2016) SISTERS OF ST. JOSEPH OF CLUNY APPELLANT VERSUS THE STATE OF

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) I.A. NO. OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION (C) No. 536 OF 2018

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) I.A. NO. OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION (C) No. 536 OF 2018 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) 1 I.A. NO. OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION (C) No. 536 OF 2018 [UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA] BETWEEN: DR. G. PARAMESHWAR & ANR. UNION

More information

LAW AREA NAME : WOMAN SECTION NAME : SPECIAL LAWS SUB SECTION NAME : DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT LAW IN BRIEF

LAW AREA NAME : WOMAN SECTION NAME : SPECIAL LAWS SUB SECTION NAME : DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT LAW IN BRIEF LAW AREA NAME : WOMAN SECTION NAME : SPECIAL LAWS SUB SECTION NAME : DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT LAW IN BRIEF Giving and taking dowry are both offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act. Demanding dowry or advertising

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) WRIT PETITION NO. 2932 OF 2010 IN THE MATTER OF: An application for a direction to the Respondents to allow the Petitioner

More information

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras. (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P. No of 2014

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras. (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P. No of 2014 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P. No. 18639 of 2014 Dr. S.P. Udayakumar 27, Isanganvilai Mani Veethi Parakkai Road Junction Nagerkovil 629 002.. Petitioner

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1199 of 2016 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1452 of 2016 With CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11072 of 2016 In LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1199

More information

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI (PRINCIPAL BENCH)

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI (PRINCIPAL BENCH) BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI (PRINCIPAL BENCH) Application No. 30 of 2011 Wednesday, the 14 th day of December, 2011 QUORUM: 1. Hon ble Justice Shri C.V. Ramulu (Judicial Member) 2. Hon

More information

% W.P.(C) No. 5513/2004

% W.P.(C) No. 5513/2004 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Judgment delivered on: November 27, 2015 % W.P.(C) No. 5513/2004 M/S MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI... Petitioner Through: Ms. Saroj Bidawat, Advocate. versus

More information

FLAG PRIMER ON THE WRIT OF AMPARO

FLAG PRIMER ON THE WRIT OF AMPARO 1. Origin of the remedy: FLAG PRIMER ON THE WRIT OF AMPARO The writ of amparo (which means protection ) is of Mexican origin. Its present form is found in Articles 103 and 107 of the Mexican Constitution.

More information

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR. W.P. No.750/2017. Bar Association Lahar, Dist. Bhind -Versus- State Bar Council of M.

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR. W.P. No.750/2017. Bar Association Lahar, Dist. Bhind -Versus- State Bar Council of M. HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR W.P. No.750/2017 Bar Association Lahar, Dist. Bhind -Versus- State Bar Council of M.P and another Shri Sameer Seth, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri R.K. Sahu,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : CORAM

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : CORAM IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 05.02.2018 CORAM The HON'BLE MS.INDIRA BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE AND The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE W.P.No.2041 of 2018 and WMP.Nos.2553 & 2554 of

More information

I have had the benefit of perusing the judgment of my. esteemed learned brother, Hon ble Justice Shri S.B. Sinha,

I have had the benefit of perusing the judgment of my. esteemed learned brother, Hon ble Justice Shri S.B. Sinha, TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI DATED 18 th JULY, 2011 Petition No. 275 (C) of 2009 Reliance Communications Limited.. Petitioner Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited..... Respondent

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 C.R.P. 589/1998. Date of Decision: 6th March, 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 C.R.P. 589/1998. Date of Decision: 6th March, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 C.R.P. 589/1998 Date of Decision: 6th March, 2009 SURINDER KAUR Through: Petitioner Ms. Nandni Sahni, Advocate. versus SARDAR

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. OF 2017 IN Writ Petition (Civil) No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. OF 2017 IN Writ Petition (Civil) No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. OF 2017 IN Writ Petition (Civil) No. 131/2013 AND IN THE MATTER OF: ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ANR. PETITIONER

More information

ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW COURT NO 2. OA 274/2014 with MA 1802/2014. Thursday, this the 16th of Feb 2015

ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW COURT NO 2. OA 274/2014 with MA 1802/2014. Thursday, this the 16th of Feb 2015 1 RESERVED ORDER A.F.R ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW COURT NO 2 OA 274/2014 with MA 1802/2014 Thursday, this the 16th of Feb 2015 Hon ble Mr. Justice Virendra Kumar DIXIT, Judicial Member

More information

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: M/S MITSUBISHI CORPORATION INDIA P. LTD Petitioner.

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: M/S MITSUBISHI CORPORATION INDIA P. LTD Petitioner. THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 30.07.2010 + WP (C) 11932/2009 M/S MITSUBISHI CORPORATION INDIA P. LTD Petitioner - versus THE VALUE ADDED TAX OFFICER & ANR... Respondent

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ---- W.P.(C)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ---- W.P.(C) 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ---- W.P.(C) No. 3768 of 2015 ------ M/s Tata Steel Limited, an existing Company under previous Company Law, through Mrs. MeenaLall wife of Shri BehariLall,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CM(M) No.887/2014 DATE OF DECISION : 25th September, 2014 VERSUS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CM(M) No.887/2014 DATE OF DECISION : 25th September, 2014 VERSUS IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CM(M) No.887/2014 DATE OF DECISION : 25th September, 2014 SMT. SALONI MAHAJAN Through: Mr. Puneet Saini, Advocate....Petitioner

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 184 OF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 184 OF IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 184 OF 2011 Federation of SBI Pensioners Association & Ors....... Petitioner(s) Versus Union of India & Ors...............

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION. CM No of 2005 in W.P. (C) No of 1987

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION. CM No of 2005 in W.P. (C) No of 1987 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION CM No. 15134 of 2005 in W.P. (C) No. 1043 of 1987 Orders reserved on : 26th July, 2006 Date of Decision : 7th August, 2006 LATE BAWA HARBANS

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION ACT, Date of decision: WP(C) No. 3595/2011 and CM Nos.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION ACT, Date of decision: WP(C) No. 3595/2011 and CM Nos. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 Date of decision: 24.05.2011 WP(C) No. 3595/2011 and CM Nos.7523/2011 YUDHVIR SINGH Versus Through: PETITIONER Mr.N.S.Dalal,

More information

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision: 16 th February, Versus

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision: 16 th February, Versus *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) No.815/2007 % Date of decision: 16 th February, 2010 OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD.... Petitioner Through: Mr. V.N. Kaura with Ms. Paramjit Benipal

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 10583-10585 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO(S). 36057-36059 OF 2016] MUNJA PRAVEEN & ORS. ETC. ETC....

More information

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision:1 st December, 2009 M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE. Versus

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision:1 st December, 2009 M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE. Versus *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) No.807/2008. % Date of decision:1 st December, 2009 M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD & ANR. Petitioner Through: Mr Prem Kumar and Mr Sharad C.

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF. (The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur, Tripura, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) W.P. (C) No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF. (The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur, Tripura, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) W.P. (C) No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF (The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur, Tripura, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) W.P. (C) No. 1343/2012 Shri Sanjib Saikia, S/o. Late Muhiram Saikia R/o. House No. 12,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : TRAI ACT, 1997 WP(C) 617/2013 & CM No.1167/2013 (interim relief) DATE OF ORDER :

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : TRAI ACT, 1997 WP(C) 617/2013 & CM No.1167/2013 (interim relief) DATE OF ORDER : IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : TRAI ACT, 1997 WP(C) 617/2013 & CM No.1167/2013 (interim relief) DATE OF ORDER : 13.03.2013 IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED & ANR....Petitioners Through: Mr. Maninder

More information

The Chairman, Himachal Pradesh Micro & Small Enterprises Facilitation Council-cum-Director of Industries, H.P.

The Chairman, Himachal Pradesh Micro & Small Enterprises Facilitation Council-cum-Director of Industries, H.P. Format for filing reference under Section 18 of Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises Development Act-2006 & Rule 4 (6) of Himachal Pradesh Micro & Small Enterprises Facilitation Council Rules-2007. To The

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT J GUNJAL. WRIT PETITION Nos /2010 (GM-RES),

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT J GUNJAL. WRIT PETITION Nos /2010 (GM-RES), 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED: THIS THE 27 th DAY OF JUNE, 2012 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT J GUNJAL WRIT PETITION Nos. 38220-221/2010 (GM-RES), BETWEEN: WRIT PETITION No.

More information

Final Judgment on Police Protection Case by Supreme Court Of India 2007 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Final Judgment on Police Protection Case by Supreme Court Of India 2007 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Final Judgment on Police Protection Case by Supreme Court Of India 2007 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5460-5466 OF 2004 MORAN M. BASELIOS MARTHOMA MATHEWS

More information

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 221/2017 & I.A.A 12707/2015

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 221/2017 & I.A.A 12707/2015 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 221/2017 & I.A.A 12707/2015 EKO INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD.... Plaintiff Through Mr. Sumit Roy, Advocate versus MR. SUSHIL KUMAR YADAV Through

More information

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com) IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Arbitration Petition No. 21 of 2017 KLA Const. Technologies Private Limited..Petitioner Versus Kajima India Private Limited Respondent Present:- Dr. Amit George,

More information

Frequently Asked Questions General Electors

Frequently Asked Questions General Electors Frequently Asked Questions General Electors Q1. What are the main categories of electors in India? Ans.- There are 3 categories of electors in India: (i) General electors, (ii) Oversees (NRI) electors

More information

DRAFT RULES UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013

DRAFT RULES UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 DRAFT RULES UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 CHAPTER XX COMPANIES (WINDING UP) RULES 2013 Ministry of Corporate Affairs Notification New Delhi Dated GSR No..:- In exercise of the powers conferred by section

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an Application under and in terms of Articles 17 and 126 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Arbitration and Conciliation Act, OMP No.356/2004. Date of decision : 30th November, 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Arbitration and Conciliation Act, OMP No.356/2004. Date of decision : 30th November, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 OMP No.356/2004 Date of decision : 30th November, 2007 AHLUWALIA CONTRACTS (INDIA) LTD. Through : PETITIONER Mr.

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR RECOVERY Date of decision: 17th July, 2013 RFA 383/2012. Versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR RECOVERY Date of decision: 17th July, 2013 RFA 383/2012. Versus IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR RECOVERY Date of decision: 17th July, 2013 RFA 383/2012 DESIGN WORKS Through: Mr. Kuldeep Kumar, Adv.... Appellant Versus ICICI BANK LTD... Respondent

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Co. Pet. 8/2015

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Co. Pet. 8/2015 IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Co. Pet. 8/2015 Madhusudan Mandal, Residing at 35E Mahanirban Road, Ground Floor, Post Office- Gariahat, Kolkata-700029,

More information

I, son / wife of Sh., aged years, resident of House No., Sector, Chandigarh, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-

I, son / wife of Sh., aged years, resident of House No., Sector, Chandigarh, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :- FORM - VII (AFFIDAVIT TO BE FURNISHED BY TRANSFERER FOR ADDITION OF NAME OF SPOUSE ON A NON-JUDICIAL STAMP PAPER OF RS. 3/- DULY ATTESTED BY MAGISTRATE IST CLASS) ------- I, son / wife of Sh., aged years,

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) W.P(C) 2085/2004

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) W.P(C) 2085/2004 IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) W.P(C) 2085/2004 Sri Amarendra Kumar Singh Son of Sri M.M.P. Singh Technical Assistant,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER. WP (C) No.4604/1996. Reserved on: Date of decision:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER. WP (C) No.4604/1996. Reserved on: Date of decision: IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER WP (C) No.4604/1996 Reserved on: 11.07.2008 Date of decision: 11.08.2008 SOHAN LAL KAPOOR Through: Major K.Ramesh, Advocate..PETITIONER

More information

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL (PROCEDURE) RULES, (1) These rules may be called the Debts Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL (PROCEDURE) RULES, (1) These rules may be called the Debts Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993. DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL (PROCEDURE) RULES, 1993 In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections(1) and (2) of section 36 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Ordinance, 1993

More information

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI Company Appeals (AT) No.101 to 105 of 2017 (arising out of Order dated 06.02.2017 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi in CP Nos. 16/152/2015,

More information

W.P.(C) No.5740 of 2001 P R E S E N T HON BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI

W.P.(C) No.5740 of 2001 P R E S E N T HON BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI BY COURT: 1 W.P.(C) No.5740 of 2001 (In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 226 of the Constitution of India) Parmanand Pandey & Anr.. Petitioners. Versus The State of Jharkhand & Ors.....

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) WRIT PETITION NO. 2932 OF 2010 IN THE MATTER OF An application under Article 102(1), 102(2)(a)(i) and 102(2)(a)(ii)

More information

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras. Dated: Coram:

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras. Dated: Coram: 1 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated: 11.03.2015 Coram: The Honourable Mr. SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, Chief Justice and The Honourable Mr. Justice M.M. SUNDRESH Writ Petition No. 15663 of 2014 R.

More information

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) No. 422 of 2010 C.R.PARK M, N & P BLOCKS RESIDENTS WELFARE

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) No. 422 of 2010 C.R.PARK M, N & P BLOCKS RESIDENTS WELFARE * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 44. + W.P.(C) No. 422 of 2010 C.R.PARK M, N & P BLOCKS RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION & ANR.... Petitioners Through: Mr. Kirti Uppal, Advocate. versus UNION OF

More information

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CELLULAR OPERATORS ASS.O.I. & ORS. - Versus -

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CELLULAR OPERATORS ASS.O.I. & ORS. - Versus - THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 15.01.2010 + W.P.(C) 583/2007 CELLULAR OPERATORS ASS.O.I. & ORS... Petitioner - Versus - NIVEDITA SHARMA & ORS... Respondent Advocates who

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3932 OF 2009 ASHIM RANJAN DAS (D) BY LRS.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3932 OF 2009 ASHIM RANJAN DAS (D) BY LRS. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3932 OF 2009 REPORTABLE ASHIM RANJAN DAS (D) BY LRS..Appellant Versus SHIBU BODHAK & ORS.. Respondents J U D G M E N T SANJAY

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (Cr.) No.261 of 2014 Md. Mansoor @ Mansoor Alam @ Manser Nauwa, son of Kalam Nauwa, R/o Wasseypur, P.O. Bhulinagar, P.S. Bank Moare, District Dhanbad.....

More information

F.No /2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /12/2009

F.No /2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi /12/2009 F.No.89-651/2009-Appeal NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002 17/12/2009 O R D E R WHEREAS the appeal of Abhivyakti College of Education

More information

Ministry of Corporate Affairs CHAPTER I PRELIMINARY. (a) Act means the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013);

Ministry of Corporate Affairs CHAPTER I PRELIMINARY. (a) Act means the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013); [To be published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-Section (i)] Ministry of Corporate Affairs New Delhi, the 18 th October, 2017 G.S.R (E). In exercise of the powers conferred

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L)NO OF 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L)NO OF 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L)NO. 2348 OF 2014 wp-2348-2014.sxw Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority.. Petitioner. V/s. The

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. Dated of Reserve: July 21, Date of Order : September 05, 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. Dated of Reserve: July 21, Date of Order : September 05, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Dated of Reserve: July 21, 2008 Date of Order : September 05, 2008 CM(M) No.819/2007 Rajiv Sud...Petitioner Through: Mr. Ravi Gupta

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2016

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2016 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2016 (Arising from the Final Judgment dated 21.04.2016 passed by the Hon ble Uttarakhand High Court at Nainital

More information

OPEN LETTER THE HON BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA, APPEAL TO RESTORE THE RIGHTS OF THE TELECOM CONSUMERS IN THE COUNTRY AND OR FOR SUO MOTU

OPEN LETTER THE HON BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA, APPEAL TO RESTORE THE RIGHTS OF THE TELECOM CONSUMERS IN THE COUNTRY AND OR FOR SUO MOTU 1 OPEN LETTER To THE HON BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA, TILAK MARG, NEW DELHI-110002. APPEAL TO RESTORE THE RIGHTS OF THE TELECOM CONSUMERS IN THE COUNTRY AND OR FOR SUO MOTU REVIEW

More information

The Court Refuses to Honor my Notice of Appeal! What do I do now!?! 1

The Court Refuses to Honor my Notice of Appeal! What do I do now!?! 1 The Court Refuses to Honor my Notice of Appeal! What do I do now!?! 1 Paul J. Notarianni 2 DISCLAIMER: This article is the property of its author, unless otherwise noted. It is made available on the Western

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE S SUJATHA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE S SUJATHA 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8 TH DAY OF APRIL 2015 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE S SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO.57422 OF 2013 (CESTAT)

More information

CRP No. 216/2014 VERSUS. Mahendra Kumar Choukhany & Ors. CRP No. 220/2014 VERSUS. Bajrang Tea manufacturing Co. [P] Ltd.

CRP No. 216/2014 VERSUS. Mahendra Kumar Choukhany & Ors. CRP No. 220/2014 VERSUS. Bajrang Tea manufacturing Co. [P] Ltd. IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) The Federal Bank Ltd. Petitioner VERSUS Mahendra Kumar Choukhany & Ors. Respondents CRP No. 220/2014 The Federal

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT: SUIT FOR POSSESSION Reserved on: 17th July, 2012 Pronounced on 3rd August, 2012 W.P. (C) No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT: SUIT FOR POSSESSION Reserved on: 17th July, 2012 Pronounced on 3rd August, 2012 W.P. (C) No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT: SUIT FOR POSSESSION Reserved on: 17th July, 2012 Pronounced on 3rd August, 2012 W.P. (C) No.865/2000 DIVINE UNITED ORGANISATION Petitioner Through: Mr.

More information

Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC THE RULE ON THE WRIT OF HABEAS DATA RESOLUTION

Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC THE RULE ON THE WRIT OF HABEAS DATA RESOLUTION Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC A. M. No. 08-1-16-SC January 22, 2008 THE RULE ON THE WRIT OF HABEAS DATA RESOLUTION Acting on the recommendation of the Chairperson of the Committee

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) /2017. Madhu Sahni & Others PETITIONERS VERSUS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) /2017. Madhu Sahni & Others PETITIONERS VERSUS IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) /2017 IN THE MATTER OF: Madhu Sahni & Others PETITIONERS VERSUS Jawaharlal Nehru University & Another RESPONDENTS

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Bihar Shops and Establishment Act, W.P.(C) No. 5114/2005. Judgment decided on:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Bihar Shops and Establishment Act, W.P.(C) No. 5114/2005. Judgment decided on: IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Bihar Shops and Establishment Act, 1956 W.P.(C) No. 5114/2005 Judgment decided on: 14.02.2011 C.D. SINGH Through: Mr Ranjan Mukherjee, Advocate....Petitioner

More information

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR DISTRICT JUDGE (ENTRY LEVEL) DIRECT RECRUITMENT EXAMINATION 2016 Adv. No. 01/S & A Cell/2016 Date : 16/08/2016 One- Vacancy and Pay Scale :- Applications are invited

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : BORDER SECURITY FORCE ACT, 1968 Date of Decision: W.P.(C) No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : BORDER SECURITY FORCE ACT, 1968 Date of Decision: W.P.(C) No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : BORDER SECURITY FORCE ACT, 1968 Date of Decision: 21.03.2012 W.P.(C) No.1616/2012 Ex. Constable Mohan Kumar Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. Respondents

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 22 ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2014 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 22 ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2014 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 22 ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2014 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR BETWEEN W.P. NO.466 OF 2012 (GM-CPC) SRI ANANTHAIAH S/O CHIKKAIAH AGED ABOUT 55

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ACT, 1987 FAO No. 332/2013 DATE OF DECISION : 16th January, 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ACT, 1987 FAO No. 332/2013 DATE OF DECISION : 16th January, 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ACT, 1987 FAO No. 332/2013 DATE OF DECISION : 16th January, 2014 RAJ KUMARI DEVI & ORS. Through: Mr. Rajnish K. Jha, Advocate....

More information

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6105/2011. % SADHNA BHARDWAJ.. Petitioner Through: Mr. Dipak Bhattarcharya, Adv.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6105/2011. % SADHNA BHARDWAJ.. Petitioner Through: Mr. Dipak Bhattarcharya, Adv. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6105/2011 Date of decision: 1 st September, 2011 % SADHNA BHARDWAJ.. Petitioner Through: Mr. Dipak Bhattarcharya, Adv. Versus THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

More information

SINGAPORE INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CENTRE (SIAC)

SINGAPORE INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CENTRE (SIAC) GUIDE TO INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION IN SINGAPORE INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CENTRE (SIAC) Written By S. Ravi Shankar Advocate on Record - Supreme Court of India National President of Arbitration Bar of India

More information

W.P.(S) No. 960 of 2005 [In the matter of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India]

W.P.(S) No. 960 of 2005 [In the matter of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India] 1 W.P.(S) No. 960 of 2005 [In the matter of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India] 1. Shiv Shankar Prasad Sinha 2. Dhirendra Mishra...... Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand

More information

THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2015

THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2015 1 AS INTRODUCED IN LOK SABHA Bill No. 252 of 2015. THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2015 A BILL to amend the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. BE it enacted by Parliament in the

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A.No. 4674 of 2012 Mahendra Kumar Ruiya................Petitioner -Versus- 1. State of Jharkhand through. 2. Gautam Kumar Dubey..........Opp. Parties ----------

More information

impugned order dated being an interim order, the dismissal of the writ petition would not come in the way of the Chancellor taking appropriat

impugned order dated being an interim order, the dismissal of the writ petition would not come in the way of the Chancellor taking appropriat Hon'ble Judges: R.V. Raveendran and G.S. Singhvi, JJ. R.V. Raveendran, J. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Civil Appeal No. 6937 of 2004 Decided On: 30.11.2009 Rajendra Agricultural University Vs. Ashok Kumar

More information

$~26, 27 & 42 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: W.P.(C) 3539/2016. versus

$~26, 27 & 42 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: W.P.(C) 3539/2016. versus $~26, 27 & 42 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 22.09.2016 + W.P.(C) 3539/2016 PHUNTSOK WANGYAL... Petitioner versus MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS & ORS... Respondents Advocates

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2017 (UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2017 (UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2017 (UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) BETWEEN: SHAILESH MANUBHAI PARMAR MLA, (54) Dani Limbda Assembly

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION. WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No. 129 OF 2015 VERSUS J U D G M E N T

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION. WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No. 129 OF 2015 VERSUS J U D G M E N T 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No. 129 OF 2015 YAKUB ABDUL RAZAK MEMON Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THR. THE SECRETARY,

More information

IN THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE AT ARUSHA-1 ST INSTANCE DIVISION

IN THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE AT ARUSHA-1 ST INSTANCE DIVISION IN THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE AT ARUSHA-1 ST INSTANCE DIVISION (Coram: Johnston Busingye, P.J; Mary Stella Arach-Amoko, DPJ; John Mkwawa, J) APPLICATION NO. 6 OF 2011 [Arising from Reference No.

More information

BHAGWAN MAHAVIR HOSPITAL H-4/5, GURU HARKISHAN MARG, PITAMPURA DELHI Phone: Fax:

BHAGWAN MAHAVIR HOSPITAL H-4/5, GURU HARKISHAN MARG, PITAMPURA DELHI Phone: Fax: GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI BHAGWAN MAHAVIR HOSPITAL H-4/5, GURU HARKISHAN MARG, PITAMPURA DELHI -110034 Email: msbmh-dhs-delhi@nic.in, Phone:- 011-27033946 Fax:- 011-27033948 LIMITED

More information

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy Information & Instructions: Petition to enforce foreign judgment 1. The following form, Petition to Enforce Foreign Judgment, is used to enforce a judgment obtained in a state other than Texas. 2. In order

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA :1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 132 OF 2011 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 307 OF 2011 WRIT PETITION NO. 132 OF 2011 Reserve Bank of India, Central Office, 21 st Floor, RBI Building, Shahid

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 WP(C) No.14332/2004 Pronounced on : 14.03.2008 Sanjay Kumar Jha...

More information

CHAPTER 4:01 LEGAL PRACTITIONERS ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I

CHAPTER 4:01 LEGAL PRACTITIONERS ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I LAWS OF GUYANA Legal Practitioners 3 CHAPTER 4:01 LEGAL PRACTITIONERS ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS SECTION 1. Short title. PART I ADMISSION AND ENROLMENT 2. Interpretation. 3. Existing practitioners to

More information

Kuria Greens Limited v Registrar of Titles & another [2011] eklr REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI PETITION NO.

Kuria Greens Limited v Registrar of Titles & another [2011] eklr REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI PETITION NO. REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI PETITION NO. 107 OF 2010 IN THE MATTER OF: ARTICLE 19, 22, 23, 40, 47, 50 & 64 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF KENYA IN THE MATTER OF: THE GOVERNMENT LANDS

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/ :31 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2017

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/ :31 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2017 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK PB 151 GRAND LLC, Index No.: Petitioner, VERIFIED PETITION -against- 9 CROSBY, LLC, Respondent. Petitioner PB 151 Grand, LLC, by its attorneys,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26 TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26 TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26 TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL 1 R AND THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B.SREENIVASE GOWDA WRIT APPEAL NOS.2663-2674/2015(T-IT)

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1534 OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.1439 of 2017) N. Harihara Krishnan Appellant Versus J. Thomas Respondent

More information

1. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal of 14 January 2009 (OJ L 24 of , p.

1. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal of 14 January 2009 (OJ L 24 of , p. RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL This edition consolidates: the Rules of Procedure of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal of 25 July 2007 (OJ L 225 of 29.8.2007, p.

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.571 OF 2017

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.571 OF 2017 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.571 OF 2017 Om Sai Punya Educational and Social Welfare Society & Another.Petitioners Versus All India Council

More information

THE SECURITY INTEREST (ENFORCEMENT) RULES,

THE SECURITY INTEREST (ENFORCEMENT) RULES, THE SECURITY INTEREST (ENFORCEMENT) RULES, 2002 1 In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) and clause (b) of sub-section (2) of Section 38 read with subsections (4), (10) and (12) of section

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN. Writ Petition Nos /2017 (T-IT)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN. Writ Petition Nos /2017 (T-IT) 1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23 RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN Writ Petition Nos.1339-1342/2017 (T-IT) Between : Flipkart

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : WILD LIFE PROTECTION ACT, BAIL APPLN. No.1626/2009. Judgment reserved on :20th October, 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : WILD LIFE PROTECTION ACT, BAIL APPLN. No.1626/2009. Judgment reserved on :20th October, 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : WILD LIFE PROTECTION ACT, 1972. BAIL APPLN. No.1626/2009 Judgment reserved on :20th October, 2011 Judgment delivered on: 16th January,2012 SUDESH KUMAR

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : PERMANENT REGISTRATION. Date of Decision: W.P.(C) 8745/2011 & C.M. Nos.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : PERMANENT REGISTRATION. Date of Decision: W.P.(C) 8745/2011 & C.M. Nos. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : PERMANENT REGISTRATION Date of Decision: 16.01.2012 W.P.(C) 8745/2011 & C.M. Nos.19767-68/2011 RANGNATHAN PRASAD MANDADAPU... Petitioner Through: Ms. Suman

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : DELHI LAND REFORMS ACT, 1954 RSA No. 252/2013 DATE OF DECISION : 15th January,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : DELHI LAND REFORMS ACT, 1954 RSA No. 252/2013 DATE OF DECISION : 15th January, IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : DELHI LAND REFORMS ACT, 1954 RSA No. 252/2013 DATE OF DECISION : 15th January, 2014 SURESH BALA & ORS Through: Mr. B.S.Mann, Advocate....Appellants VERSUS

More information