Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
While exercising the power conferred by Section 11 of the Act, the Court ceases to be a Court of Record and the review or reopening of proceedings which is sought is not with respect to any power exercised by the Court under Section 11 on merits but on account of the evident factual mistake in that order.
Mere expression “place of arbitration” cannot be the basis to determine the intention of the parties that they have intended that place as the “Seat of Arbitration”
Madhya Pradesh High Court: The Division Bench of Ravi Malimath, CJ. and Vishal Mishra, J. dismissed a second review petition holding that
Punjab and Haryana High Court: Fateh Deep Singh, J., dismissed a review application on the ground that no mistake or error was
Supreme Court: In the case where the division bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court allowed a review petition by merely stating that
Delhi High Court: Expressing that, Minor mistakes of inconsequential importance are insufficient to seek a review, Asha Menon, J., elaborated that, while
“The limited judicial review, which is available, can in no circumstance trespass upon a business decision arrived at by the majority of CoC.”
Special Court, CBI, Ghaziabad- The Court of Shivank Singh, Special Judicial Magistrate (CBI), allowed the application where permission to lead secondary evidence
Supreme Court of The United States: In a significant decision, the Court by a ratio of 6:3, declined to review petitions challenging
Madhya Pradesh High Court: In a case seeking review of an order of this particular Court by the petitioner, Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava,
Islamabad High Court: The Bench of Athar Minallah, C.J., Aamer Farooq and Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, JJ., while observing that the right to
Supreme Court: The bench of UU Lalit and Vineet Saran, JJ has refused to review the 2017 order by the bench of
Supreme Court: A bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra, JJ has reserved its order on the review petition filed by former Maharashtra
Supreme Court: The 9-judge bench of SA Bobde, CJ and R Banumathi, Ashok Bhushan, L Nageswara Rao, M M Shantanagoudar, S A
Supreme Court: The 9-judge bench of SA Bobde, CJ and R Banumathi, Ashok Bhushan, L Nageswara Rao, M M Shantanagoudar, S A
Supreme Court: A bench headed by Justice NV Ramana has agreed to hear Central government’s appeal against Delhi High Court order, which
Supreme Court: A nine-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court will hear on February 6 argument on the issue whether the court
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of R. Banumathi, Ashok Bhushan and AS Bopanna, JJ has refused to review it’s order dated 21.01.2020
As reported PTI, Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan, who appeared for Muslim parties in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute case has been