Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Bail — Annulment vs Cancellation — Annulment operates in field distinct from cancellation — Cancellation premised ...
“Vendors Cannot Escape Contract After Accepting Additional Payment Post-Deadline”
2025 PLRonline 408867 = (2025-2)217 PLR 797 (SC) (SN) Download: 2025 PLRonline 408867 = (2025-2)217 PLR 797 (SC) (SN) . ...
MOU for Joint Development Agreement Not Enforceable Under Specific Relief Act – Karnataka High Court
Karnataka HC rejects plaint for specific performance of MOU to execute JDA, holding agreement without consideration and privity of contract ...
Termination of Arbitral Proceedings for Non-Filing of Statement of Claims — Not an Arbitral Award under Section 25(a)
(2025-2)217 PLR 770 (Del.) (SN) = 2025 PLRonline 482867 HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Present: Justice Jasmeet Singh ...
Supreme Court: Deception Alone Insufficient for Cheating Without Dishonest Inducement Prosecution Must Prove Accused Made Forged Document and Had Requisite Mens Rea. ID 416860
(2025-2)217 PLR 737 (SC)(SN) = 2025 PLRonline 006 = ID 416860 2025-PLRonline-0061-1Download SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Present: Justice B.V. Nagarathna ...
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Sections 30, 31(2) & Punjab Tenancy Act, Section 5(2) – Occupancy tenants entitled to compensation – Payment wrongly made to landowners despite protest and without notice to tenants – Apportionment petition/reference by occupancy tenants maintainable – Jamabandi entries prove occupancy rights if unrebutted.
1989 PLRONLINE 003 PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT Before: Justice N.C. Jain, J. BISHAMBER - Appellant Versus STATE OF HARYANA ...
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Compensation dispute among claimants – Civil Court jurisdiction not barred – Award by Collector not final among interested persons – Claimant can file separate civil suit for resolution of dispute
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Compensation dispute among claimants – Civil Court jurisdiction not barred – Award by Collector not ...
MVA S. 164 – Under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, a claim petition filed under Section 164 (read with Section 166(3)) cannot be dismissed as time-barred. [#44601]
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 164 read with Section 166(3) - Limitation - Time-barred – Dismissal – Set aside - ...
Insurance – Proposal form – It has been clearly stated in the form that risk will commence on the date and time of acceptance of risk and/or issue of cover note/policy – It is not a policy of the insurance, nor the offending vehicle can be said to have been insured on the basis of this proposal. 2022 PLRonline 0609
2022 PLRonline 0609 HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Charat Singh ….. Appellant Versus Rajveer Kaur and others ….. ...
Employees’ Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, Section 11(2) — SARFAESI Act, 2002, Section 35 — Priority of claims — EPFO versus secured creditors
Dispute arose regarding priority of charge between EPFO and secured creditors (Axis Bank, State Bank of India, State Bank of ...
Legal Services Authority Act, 1987, Section 22-C (I) – Jurisdiction – Claim raised for a sum Rs.17 lacs whereas the Permanent Lok Adalat under second proviso of Section 22-C (I) of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987, did not have jurisdiction in the matters where value of the property in dispute exceeds ten lakh rupees – Relief granted for Rs. 4.17 lacs – Relief has not been granted beyond the jurisdiction vested in the Permanent Lok Adalat – Order upheld.
Legal Services Authority Act, 1987, Section 22-C (I) – Jurisdiction - Claim raised for a sum Rs.17 lacs whereas the ...
Sarfaesi | MSME – Framework for Revival and Rehabilitation of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises , Notification dated 29.05.2015 | NPA | Duty of Bank and Loanee
(i) Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 - Framework for Revival and Rehabilitation of Micro, Small and Medium ...
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1998 – S. 34 – Scope of Interference – Milling of Paddy – Public Policy .
M/s Vijay Rice and General Mills Ltd. & Anr. v. Punjab State Civil Supplies Corp. Ltd. & Ors.FAO-CARB-22-2025 (O&M), Decided ...
Criminal Conspiracy under Prevention of Corruption Act – Prosecution must prove meeting of minds by cogent evidence, not mere inference from disconnected circumstances – Presumption under Section 20 requires proof of demand and acceptance – Mere association or presence at crime scene insufficient to establish conspiracy – Burden cannot be shifted to accused without prima facie case. [PLRonline ID#425858]
(2025-1)216 PLR 815 (SN) = PLRonline ID#425858 Punjab and Haryana High Court Before: Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul. PARVINDER JEET SINGH ...