The Madras High Court has seen just five of its 65 judges disclose their assets. At the Chhattisgarh HC, only one out of 16 judges has done so
The NCLT, Bengaluru, had on March 27 ordered status quo on the shareholding of Aakash Educational Services Limited
Observing that courts are not supposed to do moral policing, the Supreme Court on Tuesday set aside an order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court imposing a fine of Rs 10 lakh on political analyst Tehseen Poonawalla for mocking Jain monk Tarun Sagar. A bench of Justices Abhay S Okay and Ujjal Bhuyan quashed the 2019 order of the high court which had directed Poonawala and music composer and singer Vishal Dadlani to pay costs. The top court said the high court was swayed by the fact that the appellant criticised a priest belonging to a particular religion. "What kind of order is this? There was no question of imposing cost. The court acquitted the appellants but imposed cost. Courts are not supposed to do moral policing," the bench said. Poonawala had moved the top court against the high court judgement. The high court had asked Dadlani and Poonawalla to pay Rs 10 lakh each to get the FIR against them quashed. The high court had also said that the fine was imposed to give a messag
Progress is not measured by laws and judgments alone, but by the ease with which people can seek and receive justice, Chief Justice SK Kait of the Madhya Pradesh High Court said. The chief justice made the statement while virtually inaugurating new family court buildings in Jhabua and Balaghat districts at a function. He also inaugurated housing facilities for judicial officers in Budhar (Shahdol), Rajendragram (Anuppur), Shajapur district, Kolaras (Shivpuri) and a child-friendly courtroom in Manawar (Dhar district). CJ Kait said progress is measured not just by laws and judgments but by the ease with which citizens can seek and receive justice. He said the new family court buildings in Jhabua and Balaghat will provide a well-structured space for handling family disputes. The buildings have courtrooms, filing sections, counselling rooms, a creche and other essential facilities, he said. The chief justice said the child-friendly courtroom at Manawar in Dhar district is designed to
The matter has now been posted for hearing on April 24
The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday directed taxi aggregators to stop bike taxi services in the state within six weeks. It stated that bike taxis cannot operate until the state government notifies proper guidelines under the Motor Vehicle Act. The single-judge bench of Justice B M Shyam Prasad directed the state government to ensure that bike taxi operations are halted within the stipulated time. This direction came after ride-hailing apps such as Ola, Uber, and Rapido, which also operate bike taxis, approached the High Court seeking necessary directives for the state government to formulate a policy for running bike taxis. While ordering the bike taxi operators to cease operations by six weeks, the court instructed the state government to formulate guidelines in this regard.
The Uttarakhand High Court on Wednesday put a stay on illegal constructions in Dehradun and Rishikesh, and directed Garhwal Commissioner Vinay Shankar Pandey to appear before it through video conferencing on May 5 to explain how the Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority is compounding the constructions being done in violation of the sanctioned maps in the two towns. A division bench of the high court comprising Chief Justice G Narendar and Justice Alok Mahra asked as to how the Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority (MMDA) is compounding the constructions, which are being done in violation of the sanctioned maps. The high court asked the commissioner to appear before it on May 5 to explain the situation. Pankaj Agarwal, a resident of Rishikesh, and others had filed a public interest litigation before the high court claiming that many constructions are being done in Dehradun and Rishikesh in violation of the sanctioned maps. It was said in the petition that while the MDDA has b
A special CBI court here on Saturday acquitted former Punjab and Haryana High Court judge Justice (Retd) Nirmal Yadav and four others in the 2008 cash-at-judge's door case. In the sensational case, a packet containing Rs 15 lakh was allegedly wrongly delivered at the residence of Justice Nirmaljit Kaur, another sitting high court judge, on August 13, 2008. It was alleged that the cash was meant for Justice Nirmal Yadav as a bribe to influence a property deal. The Court of Special CBI Judge Alka Malik pronounced the verdict on Saturday. Defence counsel Vishal Garg said the court acquitted former Justice Nirmal Yadav and four others. There were a total five accused in the case, one of whom died during the trial. The court on Thursday had heard the final arguments in the case registered against Justice Yadav by the Central Bureau of Investigation and posted the pronouncement of verdict for March 29.
The Supreme Court is slated to hear on Friday a plea seeking a direction to Delhi Police to lodge an FIR over the alleged discovery of semi-burnt stash of cash from the official residence of High Court judge Yashwant Varma. According to the SC's cause list for Friday, a bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan is scheduled to hear the matter. A bench headed by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna on Wednesday had refused urgent hearing after lawyer Mathews J Nedumpara mentioned the plea. The plea was filed by Nedumpara and three others on Sunday seeking a direction to police to lodge an FIR in the matter. The plea also challenges the 1991 judgement in the K Veeraswami case, in which the top court ruled that no criminal proceedings could be initiated against a judge of the high court or the top court without the prior nod of the Chief Justice of India. The alleged cash discovery happened following a fire at Varma's Lutyens Delhi residence at around 11.35 pm on March 14, prompting the
The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Thursday allowed the state government to dispose of the chemical waste from the defunct Union Carbide factory in Bhopal at a Pithampur plant after it was told that a trial incineration did not cause any adverse consequences. The four-decade-old hazardous waste shall be disposed of in a safe manner at the plant in Dhar district within 72 days, said a division bench of Chief Justice S K Kait and Justice Vivek Jain. The government had asked for 72 days to complete the process. Some local organisations in Pithampur were opposed to the disposal of the waste near the town, but the government, in its affidavit filed before the court on Thursday, said the three trials of disposal were successful and did not lead to any adverse impact. The court then directed the government to ensure that all safety measures were taken, and dispose of the waste. The government was asked to file a report on June 30, said senior advocate Naman Nagrath, representing petitioner
Adani Global Air Cargo Solutions said it was excluded from participating in the bidding process due to a technical glitch that prevented it from logging in to submit its online bid
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday listed a plea filed by jailed Jammu and Kashmir MP Sheikh Abdul Rashid alias Engineer Rashid seeking permission to attend the ongoing Parliament session for hearing on March 25. A bench of justices Chandra Dhari Singh and Anup J Bhambhani deferred the hearing after the counsel for the National Investigation Agency (NIA) said a trial court was scheduled to pronounce its verdict on the Independent Baramulla MP's regular bail plea on March 19. The senior counsel appearing for Rashid said he received the agency's response to the plea on Monday evening. Rashid, who is facing trial under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in a 2017 terror funding case, has challenged a March 10 trial court order refusing him custody parole or interim bail to attend Lok Sabha proceedings till April 4. In the reply filed to the appeal on March 17, the NIA said Rashid couldn't be allowed to use his status as MP to "get away from rigours of imprisonment". The NIA
Allahabad High Court is inviting applications for 36 Research Associate posts. Candidates can apply online from 15 March to 1 April 2025 by visiting the official website at allahabadhighcourt.in
In a suicide abetment case of an IT executive, the Allahabad High Court has refused to interfere with the FIR lodged against his wife and in-laws in Agra. A bench comprising Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Prashant Kumar passed the order Wednesday on a writ petition filed by Nipendra Kumar Sharma, father-in-law of Manav Sharma, who committed suicide, and three others. After perusal of the impugned FIR, the court observed, "Prima facie, it reveals commission of cognizable offence. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of state of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others, no case has been made out for interference with the impugned FIR." The court said, "Therefore the writ petition is dismissed leaving it open for the petitioner to apply before the competent court for anticipatory bail as permissible under." The FIR under BNS section 108 was lodged on February 28 this year at the Sadar Bazar police station, accusing Manav's w
The case pertains to a consumer complaint that PVR Cinemas delayed the screening of a movie by playing nearly 30 mins of advertisements
The Supreme Court has stayed a Bombay High Court order restraining a Pune eatery from using trademark "Burger King" until the infringement plea by the US food giant was heard and decided. A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma issued notice to Burger King Corporation on the appeal against the high court order. "The impugned order is stayed until further orders. However, the pendency of this special leave petition would not come in the way of the high court disposing of the appeal filed by the respondent herein as expeditiously as possible. We say so having regard to the fact that the respondent herein has been unsuccessful in the suit filed by it as the suit has been dismissed," the bench said on March 7. The Bombay High Court on December 2, 2024 restrained the Pune-based food business from using the name. The company in August, 2024, filed an appeal in the high court, challenging an order passed by a Pune court the same month dismissing its suit alleging ...
The Supreme Court on Thursday said courts were not expected to keep the matters concerning liberty after a long gap. A bench of Justices B R Gavai and Augustine George Masih made the observation after being informed that the Punjab and Haryana High Court posted the hearing of a plea for temporary bail on medical grounds after two months. The petitioner's counsel said he had approached the high court for the grant of temporary bail on the ground that his client's two-year-old daughter needed urgent surgery. The lawyer argued the high court, in its order passed on February 21, posted the matter on April 22. "In the matters of liberty, the courts are not expected to keep the matter at such a long date," the bench said and permitted the petitioner to move the high court for an earlier hearing. The bench asked the high court to advance the date and hear the issue at least with regard to grant of temporary bail on the medical ground of operation of the petitioner's daughter. The ...
In a crucial ruling, the Karnataka High Court has held that an insurance policy nominee does not have absolute rights over insurance benefits if the policyholder's legal heirs stake a claim. The court clarified that Section 39 of the Insurance Act, 1938, which governs nominations, does not override personal succession laws like the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The judgment came in the case of Neelavva @ Neelamma vs Chandravva @ Chandrakala @ Hema and Others, where a dispute arose over the rightful claimants to an insurance payout. Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde ruled that a nominee can receive the insurance benefits only if the legal heirs do not claim them. If a legal heir asserts their right, the nominee's claim must yield to personal succession laws. The case involved a man who had named his mother as the sole nominee for two insurance policies before his marriage. After his marriage and the birth of his child, he did not update the nomination. Following his death in 2019, a legal .
The Uttarakhand High Court has asked the state government whether it can invite suggestions afresh on the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) and consider making amendments wherever necessary. A division bench of the high court comprising senior Justices Manoj Tiwari and Ashish Naithani posed the query on Thursday to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta while hearing two new petitions challenging the UCC's provisions regarding live-in relationships. Mehta who attended the hearing via video-conferencing responded by saying all suggestions are always welcome. According to Chief Standing Counsel C S Rawat, the court also orally asked the Solicitor General to request the state assembly to implement necessary amendments to the UCC which was brought into effect in the state on January 27. The court also asked the state through the chief standing counsel whether it would be willing to make the necessary tweaks in the UCC. The PILs heard on Thursday challenged the constitutionality of information sought f
The Delhi High Court has restrained imposter domains found infringing the trademark of Tata Power Solar Systems Limited. Justice Amit Bansal was hearing the plea filed by Tata Power Solar Systems Limited against the infringement of its trademark by registrants of four imposter domains: www.tatapowersolardealership.co.in, www.tatapowersolars.com, www.tatapowersolars.org and www.tatapowersolarroof.com In a February 13 order, the court said, A bare perusal of the impugned domain names and email addresses used by the defendants (imposter domains registrants) makes it apparent that the said defendants have slavishly copied the plaintiffs' registered and well-reputed trademark TATA' and TATA POWER SOLAR' formative marks and the products of the said defendants bearing the impugned marks are being used for identical services, i.e., solar energy solutions. The court said it was a "clear case of infringement" of trademarks where the imposter domains took unfair advantage of the reputation and