Judgments - Jurisdiction
JOGENDRASINHGJI VIKAYSINHJI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS
In view of the aforesaid analysis, we proceed to summarise our conclusions as follows:- (A) Whether a letters patent appeal would lie against the order passed by the learned Single Judge that has travelled to him from the other tribunals or authorities, would depend upon many a facet. The Court fee payable on a petition to make it under Article 226 or Article 227 or both, would depend upon Full Judgment
ZUARI CEMENT LTD. Vs. REGIONAL DIRECTOR,E.S.I CORP.& ORS.
Where there is want of jurisdiction, the order passed by the court/tribunal is a nullity or non-est. What is relevant is whether the Court had the power to grant the relief asked for. ESI Court did not have the jurisdiction to consider the question of grant of exemption, order passed by the ESI Court granting exemption and consequently setting aside the demand notices is Full Judgment
Dr. Hitendra Kumar Soni Vs State of Chhattisgarh & others
The short question that arises for consideration as to whether Vacation Judge sitting alone while acting in the long vacation as a Vacation Judge can exercise the appellate jurisdiction expressly conferred by Act of 2006 to a Division Bench comprising of two judges of the High Court by virtue of Rule 41 of the Rules of 2007? . Vacation Judge sitting alone has no jurisdiction to hear writ appeals. Matter referred to Hon’ble Chief Justice for consideration. Full Judgment
SURYA VADANAN Vs. STATE OF TAMILNADU & ORS
The question before us relates to the refusal by the Madras High Court to issue a writ of habeas corpus for the production of the children of Surya Vadanan and Mayura Vadanan. The appellant sought their production to enable him to take the children with him to the U.K. since they were wards of the court in the U.K. to enable the foreign court to decide the issue of their custody. The principle Full Judgment
M/S BHANDARI UDYOG LTD Vs. INDUSTRIAL FACILITATION COUNCIL & ANR
The short question that falls for consideration in this appeal is as to whether the Bombay High Court has correctly decided the jurisdiction of a Court to entertain application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996? Indisputably, the Arbitration proceeding has been conducted within the jurisdiction of Raichur court, which has jurisdiction as per Section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure and is Full Judgment
State through CBI New Delhi Vs Jitender Kumar Singh
The Special Judge appointed under Section 3(1) could exercise the powers under sub-section (3) to Section 4 to try non-PC offence. Therefore, trying a case by a Special Judge under Section 3(1) is a sine-qua-non for exercising jurisdiction by the Special Judge for trying any offence, other than an offence specified in Section 3. “Trying any case” under Section 3(1) is, therefore, a jurisdictional fact for the Special Judge Full Judgment
Bhaskar Laxman Jadhav & Ors.Vs. Karamveer Kakasaheb Wagh Education Society & Ors.
Helios & Matheson Information Technology Ltd. & Ors. Versus Rajeev Sawhney & Anr.
- 1
- 2
- Next
- Last