“Waterbodies Must Not Be Destroyed in the Name of Public Interest”: Madras High Court
Case Title : R.Manibharathi versus Union of India and others Case No: WP(MD) Nos.31214 & 31221 of 2023 And WMP(MD)Nos.26742, 26743, 26745 &
Mandatory for the IT Department to comply with the CBDT’s Digital Evidence Investigation Manual while conducting search and seizure: Madras High Court
Case title – W.P.No.9753, 9757 and 9761 of 2023 – M/s.Saravana Selvarathnam Retails Pvt Ltd, M/s.Shri Rathna Akshaya Estates Pvt Ltd &
Supreme Court rules against the wrongful denial of employment of coal mine workers.
Case title: Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. V. Brajrajnagar Coal Mines Workers’ Union. Case no.: CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 4092-4093/2024 Decided on: 12.04.20
A mere breach of contract would not attract prosecution for Criminal offence in every case: Supreme Court.
Case title: Naresh Kumar and Anr. vs State of Karnataka and Anr. Case no.: SLP (CRL.) NO. 1570 OF 2021 Decided on: 12.04.2024 Quorum: Hon’ble Jus
A notice to terminate the contract cannot be issued unilaterally by one party without the adjudication of the Court: Jharkhand High Court
Case title – M/s Aditya and Rashmi Construction Pvt. Ltd. VS The State of Jharkhand & Ors Case no. – W.P. (C) No. 2924 of 2014 Decision on
Assessing Officer not entitled to make additions again, when the same had been deleted by the CIT(A): Bombay High Court
Case title – CCIT (OSD)/Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax VS Bhupendra Champaklal Dalal Case no. – Income Tax Appeal No.1491 OF 2019 (A.Y. 1989-19
Supreme Court makes distinction between Culpable Homicide and Murder, sets aside conviction u/s 302 of IPC.
Case title: Shahid Ali vs State of Uttar Pradesh Case no.: SLP (Criminal) No(s). 9454 of 2021 Decided on: 11.03.2024 Quorum: Hon’ble Justice Sati
Right to live a life with dignity cannot be put in jeopardy on the basis of half-baked evidence: Supreme Court.
Case title: Nirmal Premkumar and Anr. vs State Rep. By Inspector of Police Case no.: Criminal Appeal No. 1098 OF 2024 Decided on: 11.03.2024 Quor
Conflicting marks must be read in its entirety; No Exclusive Rights on the use of generic term like ‘Dish’: Delhi High Court
Case title – Prasar Bharti VS Dish TV India Ltd. Case no. – FAO (OS) (COMM) 267/2019 before the High Court of New Delhi Decision on –
Implementation of CAA rules in accordance with the 2019 manifesto: Inclusion of Non-Muslims v/s Exclusion of Muslims – Preference or Discrimination
Introduction The Union government on March 11th issued the rules for the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, or CAA, four years after the passing of the c
