Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: sashastra seema bal act 2007 section 115 delivery of lunatic accused to relatives Sorted by: recent Page 1 of about 107 results (0.116 seconds)

Oct 03 2024 (SC)

Khalsa University Vs. The State Of Punjab

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... university were approved by the state government.19. thereafter on 30th may 2017, the state government promulgated an ordinance thereby repealing the 2016 act. the impugned act came to be passed by punjab vidhan sabha, which received the assent of the hon ble governor on 12 4th july 2017 and ..... the complaints received that an institution of national importance was suffering 16 (2004) 1 scc712:2003. insc66742 from mismanagement and maladministration. the central government acted on such findings. circumstances warranting an emergent action satisfied the president of india, resulting in his promulgating ordinances which earlier could not culminate in ..... department of higher education, government of punjab, that they have enacted the statutes of the khalsa university in consonance with the 2010 policy, the 2016 act and university grants commission5 guidelines. 3.7. on 6th april 2017, the superintendent of higher education department, government of punjab, communicated to khalsa university .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 01 2024 (HC)

Somling @ Some Vs. The State Through

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

..... two appeals. it is necessary to observe that, such principles have evolved over the years and crystallized into settled principles of law , these are: i) section 134 of indian evidence act, 1872, enshrines the well-recognized maxim that evidence has to be weighed and not counted. in other words, it is the quality of evidence that matters and not the quantity ..... no.200113 of 2017 para 43 of the judgment it is observed by the allahabad high court that it is settled that, the testimony of single eye witness can be acted upon if otherwise reliable and corroboration required only when his evidence is open to doubt and suspicious. a close relative, who is a natural witness, cannot be recorded as an .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 01 2024 (HC)

Kamanna @ Kama Vs. State Of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

..... two appeals. it is necessary to observe that, such principles have evolved over the years and crystallized into settled principles of law , these are: i) section 134 of indian evidence act, 1872, enshrines the well-recognized maxim that evidence has to be weighed and not counted. in other words, it is the quality of evidence that matters and not the quantity ..... no.200113 of 2017 para 43 of the judgment it is observed by the allahabad high court that it is settled that, the testimony of single eye witness can be acted upon if otherwise reliable and corroboration required only when his evidence is open to doubt and suspicious. a close relative, who is a natural witness, cannot be recorded as an .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 19 2024 (HC)

U B Shetty Vs. State Of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

..... section 96 of the cpc, which deals with appeals from decrees. parties often raise 47 multiple grounds that are not legally permissible under the arbitration act, leading to unnecessary litigation and inefficiency. this practice contradicts the legislative intent behind arbitration, which aims for finality and efficiency in dispute resolution.47. ..... resolution, has now become an integral part of the indian legal system. the comprehensive statute dealing with arbitrations, that is, the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996, is a complete code in itself and is in tune with the international standards set out in model law on international commercial arbitration adopted ..... judge (commercial court) at bengaluru, dismissing each of the said arbitration suits filed by the appellant/contractor, under section 34 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996.2. the brief facts of the cases necessary for adjudication, are as under: the appellant / contractor was a successful bidder for 14 projects .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 19 2024 (HC)

Smt. G K Akshata Vs. V Raghavendra

Court : Karnataka

..... invoking section 319 crpc, is only a device by which the respondent seeks to initiate prosecution against dakshin beyond the period of limitation stipulated under the act.26. no doubt section 142 authorises the court to condone the delay in appropriate cases. we find no reason to condone the delay. the justification ..... . hence the instant slp.25. the question whether the respondent had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint against dakshin within the period prescribed under the act is not examined by either of the courts below. as rightly pointed out, the application, which is the subject-matter of the instant appeal purportedly filed ..... through its branch manager, was served solely to simaiya hariramani, the authorised signatory of the firm. the complaint dated 07th december 2015 under section 138 of the ni act before the court of judicial magistrate, balodabazar, chhattisgarh, was made against simaiya hariramani and the appellant. thus, in the present case, the firm has not .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 19 2024 (HC)

Smt K R Aruna Prasad Vs. Sri V Raghavendra

Court : Karnataka

..... invoking section 319 crpc, is only a device by which the respondent seeks to initiate prosecution against dakshin beyond the period of limitation stipulated under the act.26. no doubt section 142 authorises the court to condone the delay in appropriate cases. we find no reason to condone the delay. the justification ..... . hence the instant slp.25. the question whether the respondent had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint against dakshin within the period prescribed under the act is not examined by either of the courts below. as rightly pointed out, the application, which is the subject-matter of the instant appeal purportedly filed ..... through its branch manager, was served solely to simaiya hariramani, the authorised signatory of the firm. the complaint dated 07th december 2015 under section 138 of the ni act before the court of judicial magistrate, balodabazar, chhattisgarh, was made against simaiya hariramani and the appellant. thus, in the present case, the firm has not .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 04 2024 (HC)

Meghana Kuruvalli Vs. The State Of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

..... solicitor general. it was then submitted that the rights of the oci cardholders cannot be claimed beyond the notification issued under section 7b of the citizenship act. he submitted that therefore, the rationale lies in not grouping the oci cardholder with indian citizen for applying 371j reservation. 4.5 learned additional ..... undisputedly stated. the petitioner stayed upto 4th december 2018 in the foreign country- britain. he submitted that by virtue of section 9 of the citizenship act, which contemplate the circumstances leading to termination of citizenship, the petitioner s citizenship of india ceased. it was the next submission that the petitioner as ..... being enjoyed by the petitioners. though the notification was sustained as having been backed by competent sovereign power - 28 - under the statute of citizenship act, it was held that it is sustainable prospectively only. it was ruled that the portion of the notification which provide for suppression of the earlier notifications .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 31 2024 (HC)

Sri Vikram Ballari Vs. Central Bureau Of Investigation

Court : Karnataka

..... the society in general. the concept of fair trial entails familiar triangulation of interests of the accused, the victim and the society and it is the community that acts through the state and prosecuting agencies. interests of society are not to be treated completely with disdain and as persona non grata. courts have always been considered to ..... ends of justice, he may order that any particular case be transferred from one criminal court to another criminal court in his sessions division. (2) the sessions judge may act either on the report of the lower court, or on the application of a party interested, or on his own initiative. (3) the provisions of sub-sections (3 ..... by a written order stating the material facts of the case and served in the manner provided by section 134, direct any person to abstain from a certain act or to take certain order with respect to certain property in his possession or under his management, if such magistrate considers that such direction is likely to prevent, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 31 2024 (HC)

Sri Basavaraj Shivappa Mutthagi Vs. Central Bureau Of Investigation

Court : Karnataka

..... the society in general. the concept of fair trial entails familiar triangulation of interests of the accused, the victim and the society and it is the community that acts through the state and prosecuting agencies. interests of society are not to be treated completely with disdain and as persona non grata. courts have always been considered to ..... ends of justice, he may order that any particular case be transferred from one criminal court to another criminal court in his sessions division. (2) the sessions judge may act either on the report of the lower court, or on the application of a party interested, or on his own initiative. (3) the provisions of sub-sections (3 ..... by a written order stating the material facts of the case and served in the manner provided by section 134, direct any person to abstain from a certain act or to take certain order with respect to certain property in his possession or under his management, if such magistrate considers that such direction is likely to prevent, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 29 2024 (SC)

Akshay Vs. Aditya

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... with the respondents complainants for the units in question.3. the respondents complainants filed the complaints before the `state commission under section 17 of the consumer protection act, 1986 against the present appellants and respondent no.2 seeking inter alia the declaration that the present appellants and the respondent no.2 were jointly and severally involved ..... by the letter of revocation dated 12-8-2014, coupled with public notice of the same date and hence the appellants could not be held liable for any act done by respondent no.2, who had allegedly entered into agreements with the complainants. he also submitted that the complaints as such are not 6 maintainable under the ..... letter of revocation dated 12-8-2014, submitted that even as per the said letter, the appellants had stated that they could not be liable for the acts of the respondent no.2 henceforth meaning thereby after the said letter, however, the respondent no.2 had entered into the agreement with the complainants i.e .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //