On 30/10/2017 The District Consumer Forum Warangal passed an interesting judgment in the case CC/4/2017 (Ravichandra. D Vs Samsung Electronics). The DCF Warangal passed the above Judgment directing the Complainant (i.e) Consumer to pay Rs10,000..
The Educational Appellate Tribunal under Karnataka Education Act 1983 in my considered opinion is well within its jurisdiction to declare the terms and condition No 3 in the appointment order as void illegal and unenforceable in an application filed ..
The Hon’ble CESTAT, Chennai held as under: - The Adjudicating Authority had rightly computed the interest amount from the due date till the date of payment in respect of demand for the month of January, 2011, by working out interest at 13% up to M..
The Hon’ble CESTAT, Bangalore held that although there is no specific 'relevant date' under Section 11B of the Excise Act to claimrefund of unutilized credit, but, that would not rule out applicability of Section 11B. Relevant date should be the date..
Hon’ble Apex Court held that it cannot be the intention of the Legislature to provide rebate only on one item i.e. either on inputs or final products. It was further held that giving such restrictive meaning to Rule 18 of the Excise Rules would not o..
We are of the opinion that the judgment of the High Court has not discussed and decided the issue correctly and warrants interference. We, thus, allow these appeals and set aside the judgment of the High Court by holding that Sodexo Meal Vouchers are..
The collegium system of judicial appointments is here to stay. The Supreme Court today declared the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), and the Constitutional amendments involved, to be in violation of the Constitution of India...
Judgement of Hon’ble Mr. Lodha (J) & Mr. Gokhale (J) in Civil Appeal No. 684/2004 State of MP v/s Rakesh Kohli delivered on May 11, 2012 w.r.t. Stamp Act applicable to State of M. P. (Stamp Duty on POA when given to Non-Relative)..
Judgments of the higher court/s and/or the Apex Court are either per incuriam and/or stare-decisis and/or against the doctrine of Pith N Substance and/or Ultra Vires and/or otherwise untenable looking to the ground realities. Such judgments remain ..
The Supreme Court bench comprising of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Pinaki Chandra Ghose prescribed detailed guidelines on the issuing of government advertisements. ..
The Supreme Court bench comprising of Justices J. Chelameswar and Pinaki Chandra Ghose held that the printed date on the cheque, in absence of any other evidence, cannot be conclusive of the fact that the cheque was issued on that particular date. ..
The Petitioner is an Indian citizen and a practicing Advocate. He claims to be affected by the levy of Service Tax on Advocates. It is the case of the Petitioner that section 65(105) (zzzzm) of the Finance Act, 1994 as inserted by the Finance Act 200..
The Petitioner, Vodafone India Services Pvt. Ltd., is a wholly owned subsidiary of a non-resident company, Vodafone Tele-Services (India) Holdings Limited (the holding company). In AY 2009-10,the Petitioner issued equity shares on a premium to its ho..
The Competition Commission of India held Super Cassettes Industries Limited in contravention of the provisions of section 4(2)(a)(i) of the Competition Act, 2002 for imposing unfair conditions of Minimum Commitment Charges (MCC) upon the private FM S..
The Supreme Court bench comprising of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and R.K. Agrawal held that a Will drawn up in English is valid, even if the person bequeathing his/her property was ignorant of the language, provided the content was explained to the testat..
The Competition Commission of India found 14 car companies in contravention of the provisions of the Competition Act, 2002. Commission also imposed a penalty calculated at the rate of 2% of the average turnover of the 14 car companies amounting to Rs..
The National Green Tribunal bench headed by Justice Swatanter Kumar directed the Ministry of Environment and Forest not to appoint persons as Chairperson/Members of the Expert Appraisal Committee/State Expert Appraisal Committee who do not have exper..
The issue raised before the Bombay High Court was that whether a resolution for approval of a Scheme of Amalgamation can be passed under Section 110 of the Companies Act, 2013 and SEBI Circular dated May 21, 2013, by a majority of the equity sharehol..
The Respondent is an investment company in which individual members of the Bilakhia family held equal interest. The family members executed a deed of family arrangement with an objective to consolidate and equalize values of the assets held by each o..
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
