• 

  Mere denial of marriage with complainant is not a ground to quash the proceedings for the offences under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. Orissa High Court.

  • 07-December-2022
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Principal employer paying salary and PF contribution of the contractor’s employees does not make them employees of the principal employer. Supreme Court.

  • 07-December-2022
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Price charged from independent parties for the sale of excisable goods can be used as a benchmark for determination of excise duty on related transactions when such a price is readily available. Supreme Court.

  • 07-December-2022
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  In a suit for specific performance, the proposed buyer can be impleaded to avoid multiplicity of the proceedigs. High Court of Chhattisgarh

  • 06-December-2022
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Increasing litigation in public distribution system. “Stop indiscriminate allotment of fair price shops or discriminate distribution of cards”. Karnataka High Court.

  • 06-December-2022
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  “There should be devotion in politics; and not politics in devotion”. Karnataka High Court restrains shifting of deity to old/dilapidated temple, in public interest.

  • 06-December-2022
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Application for permission to sue as an indigent person can be rejected if the allegations in the plaint do not show any cause of action or if the suit is barred by res judicata. Supreme Court.

  • 06-December-2022
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  When due to pendency of the land acquisition proceedings, the possession could not be taken over, the landowners cannot contend that the land acquisition proceedings have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013. Supreme Court.

  • 06-December-2022
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  A co-owner cannot seek temporary injunction against another co-owner on the ground of adverse possession unless there is a partition of the property by metes and bounds. Karnataka High Court.

  • 03-December-2022
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  “The key feature of the policy is essentiality”. Karnataka High Court upholds Government of India policy imposing 30% trade margin on the manufacturer of essential drugs for combating cancer.

  • 03-December-2022
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  Sales officer does not fall within the definition of workman and hence cannot raise a dispute under the Industrial Dispute Act. Karnataka High Court.

  • 05-December-2022
  • Daksha Legal
• 

  MVC Act. Insurance Company cannot escape its liability by merely branding driving license as fake without actually proving the same. Karnataka High Court.

  • 05-December-2022
  • Daksha Legal