Finance judiciary-2

Allahabad High Court Verdict in brief in Ayodhya Case

Allahabad High Court on Thursday ruled by a majority verdict that the disputed land in Ayodhya be divided equally into three parts among Hindus and Muslims and that the place where the makeshift temple of Lord Ram exists belongs to Hindus....

Read More
Posted Under: Finance |

Brief Summary of Allahabad High Court decision in Ayodhya Case

The Sunni Central Board of Waqfs U.P.Lucknow & others Vs Gopal Singh Visharad and others

Bhagwan Sri Rama Viraj man & Ors. Vs. Sri Rajendra Singh & Ors. The instant suit was filed on behalf of the deities and Sri Ram Janm Bhumi through the next friend, praying that the defendants be restrained not to interfere in the construction of the temple of plaintiff nos. 1 and 2 on the ground that the deities are perpetual minors and a...

Read More
Posted Under: Finance |

Unless mala fides are writ large, delay should be condoned. Matters should be disposed of on merits and not technicalities : SC

Improvement Trust Vs Ujagar Singh & Ors. (Supreme Court of India)

1. Heard counsel on either side at length. Records perused. 2. Even though both sides had cited several decisions of this Court on the scope and application of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, but it is neither necessary nor required to deal with those cases in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case....

Read More

SC says rational and sobber Criticism of judiciary in national interest

Hari Singh Nagra and others Vs Kapil Sibal and others (Supreme Court of India)

The Supreme Court has taken a sagacious view of the criticism of judges while dismissing a contempt of court case against Union Minister Kapil Sibal. In fact, it encourages “fair and reasonable” criticism of judgments as judges are not “infallible”. What provoked the petition was a message the minister had written for a souvenir b...

Read More

Tech-savvy Supreme Court directs service of Notice by E-Mail to avoid delay

CERC Vs National Hydroelectric Power Corp (Supreme Court of India)

In various Courts, the statistical data indicates that, on account of delay in process serving, arrears keep on mounting. In Delhi itself, the input indicates that fifty per cent of the arrears in Courts particularly in commercial cases is on account of delay in process serving....

Read More

Non-Advocates cannot give legal opinions: HC

Lawyers Collective Vs. Bar Council of India (Bombay High Court)

Foreign Law Firms are not eligible to open liaison offices or to practice law in India. Even giving an opinion on a legal matter amounts to “practise of law”. Non-Advocates cannot practise law. ...

Read More

Supreme Court on Applicability of ESI Act, if not reviewed, can create havoc

Employees State Insurance Corporation Vs. Bhakra Beas Management Board and Anr. (Supreme Court)

It appears that the appellant had issued a notice under Section 45A of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter for short 'the Act') for making employer's contribution towards the employee’s state insurance. The respondent No. 1 Board challenged that notice before the Employees State Insurance Court, Delhi. It appears that n...

Read More

Delhi High Court decision regarding applicability of service tax on rent

Home Solution Retail India Ltd Vs UOI & ORS (Delhi High Court)

The Delhi High Court held that the renting of immovable property is not a service, and accordingly, the levy of service tax on the activity of renting is “ultra vires.” The decision may have significant accounting implications on the entities. The judgment delivered by the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court...

Read More

Practice as advocate not required for appointment as HC judge

Mahesh Chandra Gupta Vs. UOI (Supreme Court)

Shri. Satish Chandra, former ITAT Member, was appointed judge of the Allahabad High Court on 6.8.2008. The appointment was challenged on the ground that he had not practiced for even a day as an advocate and that he was not eligible for appointment under Article 217(2) and Article 217(1) of the Constitution. It was also alleged that the m...

Read More

Section 164 attracted when shares of beneficiaries are unknown

CIT v P. Sekar Trust (Madras High Court)

Section 164 gets attracted only when the shares of the beneficiaries are unknown, which is manifest from the marginal heading of that section itself; so long as the trust deed gives the details of the beneficiaries and the description of the person who is to be benefited, the beneficiaries cannot be said to be uncertain, merely because wi...

Read More
Page 4 of 512345

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,455)
Company Law (3,350)
Custom Duty (6,582)
DGFT (3,420)
Excise Duty (4,040)
Fema / RBI (3,237)
Finance (3,418)
Income Tax (24,916)
SEBI (2,722)
Service Tax (3,278)