Address:Prime Legal, 39/2, 2nd floor, K G Road, Bengaluru 560009
Emailsupport@primelegal.in
Call now: 97400 13535
 

Blogs And Articles

By the team of Prime Legal
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
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
December 16, 2022by Primelegal Team0

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

CONTINUE READING
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
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
December 16, 2022by Primelegal Team0

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’

CONTINUE READING
HC stays Section 263 order as Mandatory twin pre conditions were prima facie not fulfilled: Gauhati High Court
December 16, 2022by Primelegal Team0

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

CONTINUE READING
MERELY BECAUSE ONE WITNESS HAS TURNED HOSTILE DOES NOT ENTITLE THE PETITIONER TO SEEK BAIL SAYS: KARNATAKA HC
December 16, 2022by Primelegal Team0

In the matter of Saddam Hussain @ Saddam vs State Of Karnataka on 23 November, 2022(CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9337 OF 2022) presided by THE HON’BL

CONTINUE READING
High Court denies pre-arrest bail as petitioner failed to prove genuineness of his GST payment: Gauhati High Court
December 16, 2022by Primelegal Team0

Gauhati High Court on 27/10/2021 decided that whatever papers submitted by the petitioner to prove the genuineness of his GST payment appears not o

CONTINUE READING
There is nothing which the defendant has been able to demonstrate that there is any plausible defence to the unimpeachable claim of the plaintiff.: Calcutta High Court
December 15, 2022by Primelegal Team0

The above was opined by the Calcutta High Court in the case of Anchor Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. TCI Finance Ltd IA No: GA/2/2019 in CS/133/2019 that

CONTINUE READING
This Court finds that when the petitioner came to know about the suit, the petitioner has taken appropriate steps but the Learned Advocate had not appeared and not moved the application, the petitioner should not suffer from ex-parte-decree: Calcutta High Court
December 15, 2022by Primelegal Team0

The Calcutta High Court opined the above-mentioned in the case Chirantan Housing Pvt. Ltd. v. Youdhister Kumar Dhanania, IA No. GA/2/2021 in CS/29/

CONTINUE READING
THE FIR DISCLOSES THAT THE SECOND RESPONDENT’S SON WAS NOT ALLOWED TO PLAY IN THE GROUND BECAUSE OF HIS CASTE. POLITICAL RIVALRY IS JUST A DEFENCE PROJECTED BY THE APPELLANT AT THIS STAGE, WHICH REQUIRES INVESTIGATION SAYS: KARNATAKA HC
THE FIR DISCLOSES THAT THE SECOND RESPONDENT’S SON WAS NOT ALLOWED TO PLAY IN THE GROUND BECAUSE OF HIS CASTE. POLITICAL RIVALRY IS JUST A DEFENCE PROJECTED BY THE APPELLANT AT THIS STAGE, WHICH REQUIRES INVESTIGATION SAYS: KARNATAKA HC
December 15, 2022by Primelegal Team0

  In the matter of Ganesha L D vs State By on 23 November, 2022 (CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1816 OF 2022) presided by the hon’ble justice Sreenivas Hari

CONTINUE READING
IN ORDER TO TAKE THE CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE, THERE MUST BE COGENT EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT, UNLESS THE DRIVER HAS BEEN EXAMINED. HE IS THE RIGHT PERSON TO SPEAK WITH REGARD TO THE CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE IS CONCERNED AND NO SUCH EVIDENCE HAS BEEN LED BEFORE THE COURT SAYS: KARNATAKA HC
December 15, 2022by Primelegal Team0

In the matter of M/S. Oriental Insurance Company … vs Laxmamma on 23 November, 2022(M.F.A.NO.2841/2013 (MV-D)) presided by The hon’ble just

CONTINUE READING
This court finds that the judgment relied by the plaintiff is distinguishable and the judgment relied by the defendants are squarely applicable in the instant case: Calcutta High Court
December 14, 2022by Primelegal Team0

The above was opined by the Calcutta High Court in the case of Mukesh Jaiswal  v. Phool Chand Gupta and Ors, IA NO. GA/2/2022 in CS/211/2019 presi

CONTINUE READING

    Prime Legal Law Firm

    We at Prime Legal, aim to achieve justice for all our clients by providing individual attention and dedicated legal support. We always prioritize confidentiality and ensure our clients' legal needs are met with the highest standards of professionalism and integrity.