delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“During the pendency of the present petition, the petitioner had reached the age of superannuation. Therefore, the Court held that ends of justice would be met if petitioner was directed to be paid compensation in lieu of reinstatement and back wages.”

Continue reading
delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“A total ban could have unintended consequences, affecting sectors where acid is responsibly and safely utilized. Therefore, striking a balance between public safety and the legitimate uses of acid for industrial and other regulated purposes is crucial.”

Continue reading
delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“The seriousness of the allegations in the case at hand and its impact on children, who are the future of the country, cannot be overlooked. It is the duty of the petitioner to ensure that nutritious meal is provided to the children for their development.”

Continue reading
uttaranchal high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“District Magistrates might join the proceedings virtually, whereas the Secretary, Animal Husbandry and the Chairperson of the Executive Committee of the State Animal Welfare Board should personally remain present in Court, to assist the Court.

Continue reading
delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Rule 22 (2) & (3) of Delhi Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens (Amendment) Rules, 2016 gives powers to the District Magistrate to pass an Order of eviction in case it is found that the senior citizens are being ill-treated and are not being maintained by their children.

Continue reading
delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

An Arbitral Tribunal cannot arrogate to itself powers that are neither conferred by the statute, or the rules which govern the arbitration, nor can it take recourse to inherent powers, which as has been found hereinabove, are acknowledged to inhere in courts and judicial authorities only.

Continue reading
tis hazari court
Case BriefsDistrict Court

If there is cogent evidence that the accused was shown to prosecution witnesses, refusal to participate in test identification parade by accused is justified and the said test identification parade cannot be used against the accused for any purpose. If identification in Test Identification Parade has taken place after the accused is shown to the witnesses, then not only is the evidence of Test Identification Parade inadmissible, even an identification in a court during trial is meaningless.

Continue reading