Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Delhi Building and other Construction Workers Welfare Board is duty-bound to extend benefits to building workers in line with the provisions of the Delhi Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996, which is a social welfare legislation.

Continue reading
Punjab and Haryana High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Court warned petitioner’s counsel to exercise a tad more caution in future legal escapades as it would not want to inadvertently summon anymore ghostly clients or find us entangled in a legal mess of supernatural proportions.

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

MSMED Act is a beneficial legislation for Micro Small & Medium Enterprises and provides that a buyer can also raise counter claims before the statutory arbitrator under the MSMED Act. Moreover, the scope of the Act as stated therein is to the extent that even if there is an agreement for arbitration between the parties, the MSMED Act will have overriding effect.

Continue reading
Allahabad High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“Magistrate had issued summons without meeting the requirement of Section 202 CrPC., even though the applicants were residing outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Trial Court.”

Continue reading
Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Court opined that all nine contracts are related to same project and if it is accepted that there is an Arbitration Clause only in five contracts, then parties will have to be relegated to civil proceedings, which will lead to multiplicity of disputes, delay in adjudication and possibility of conflicting rulings.

Continue reading
Valid proof of Hindu marriage
Case BriefsSupreme Court

“A marriage is not an event for ‘song and dance’ and ‘wining and dining’ or an occasion to demand and exchange dowry and gifts by undue pressure leading to possible initiation of criminal proceedings thereafter. A marriage is not a commercial transaction.”

Continue reading
Madras High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The petitioner was retired from service by superannuation and hence, the employer – employee relationship between the petitioner and the University had come to an end and hence, the University holds no Authority to re-fix the salary and the consequential benefits of the petitioner.

Continue reading