ARTICLE ON AFFIDAVIT ON HOW TO MAKE IT AND HOW TO MAKE IT VALID
What is an affidavit? An affidavit (/ˌæfɪˈdeɪvɪt/ (listen) AF-ih-DAY-vit; Medieval Latin for “declared under oath”) is a writte
Double jeopardy
Double jeopardy, in law, protection against the use by the state of certain multiple forms of prosecution. In general, in countries observing the
Nature and character of subject matter have to be preserved for the effective adjudication of the issues to the suit: the Uttarakhand high court
The Uttarakhand high court passed a judgement on 24th September 2022 in the case C.S Rawat and Shri Yogesh Tiwari v. Shri Animesh Singh (writ appea
Irrespective of the Personal Rights of a person or a community, it can under no set of circumstances, override the rights or need of the defence of the country: The Uttarakhand high court
The Uttarakhand High Court passed a judgement on 4th of March, 2022 in which it subdued the queries of a division bench, which had a query arising
We are of the view that since a notice under Section 400(1) has been issued, the same should be carried to its logical conclusion in accordance with law: Calcutta High Court
The above was opined by the Calcutta High Court in the case of Hamidul Haque v. Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors. IA No. GA/1/2022 with OCOT/5
The Tribunal has been thorough with regards to facts and has done a commendable job in contractual facilitation while keeping disputes for future deliberation: Calcutta High Court
The above-mentioned was opined by the Calcutta High Court in the case Gainwell Commosales Private Limited v. Minsol Limited, APO / 74 /2022 before
EVEN THOUGH THEY MAY BE “PUBLIC SERVANTS” WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE KL ACT, THEY ARE NOT “GOVERNMENT SERVANTS” WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE SAID ACT AS WELL AS CCA RULES SAYS: KARNATAKA HC
In this matter S G Padmanabha vs State Of Karnataka on 22 November, 2022( W.P. No.50413 OF 2019 (GM-KLA)) presided by THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE
THOUGH THERE IS NO HARD AND FAST RULE AS TO HOW MUCH TIME SHOULD BE TAKEN BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY OR THE GOVERNMENT FOR CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION, THE TIME TAKEN BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONER’S REPRESENTATION IN THE PRESENT CASE IS INORDINATE AND CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS REASONABLE: SAYS KARNATAKA HC
In the matter of Mohammed Riyaz vs The State Of Karnataka on 22 November, 2022(W.P.H.C. No.74/2022) presided by THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VIS
IF THE PETITIONER IS WILLING TO SUBMIT THE DOCUMENTS TO THE AUTHORITY, AS INFORMED BY THE AUTHORITY AND REFERRED TO IN THE COMMUNICATION, THEN THESE DOCUMENTS MAYBE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AUTHORITY WITHIN 10 DAYS FROM TODAY. IF THE PETITIONER FAILS TO SUBMIT ANY DOCUMENT WITHIN ONE WEEK FROM TODAY, THE RESPONDENTS/AUTHORITIES ARE AT LIBERTY TO TAKE DECISION ON THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER ON THE MATERIAL WHICH IS AVAILABLE WITH THE AUTHORITY SAYS KARNATAKA HC
In the matter of Sri K R Narappa vs The Principal Secretary on 23 November, 2022(WRIT PETITION NO.21215 OF 2022 (GM-MMS) presided by THE HON’
HC stays Section 263 order as Mandatory twin pre conditions were prima facie not fulfilled: Gauhati High Court
Gauhati High Court on 19/08/2021 decided the stays Section 263 order as Mandatory twin pre conditions were prima facie not fulfilled. This was seen
