Case Brief: Swadesh Kumar Agarwal v. Dinesh Kumar Agarwal
The Sole Arbitrator was absent on one of the specified occasions, making it impossible for him to conduct the proceedings.
MAKING LAW SIMPLE!
The Sole Arbitrator was absent on one of the specified occasions, making it impossible for him to conduct the proceedings.
The case of Managing Director ECIL v. B. Karunakar, heard by the Supreme Court of India in 1993, concerned the dismissal of an employee of Electronics Corporation of India Limited (ECIL). The case involved issues of natural justice, disciplinary proceedings, and the scope of the Public Servant (Inquiries) Act, 1850.
In November, 1861, Fletcher brought an action against Ryland … V. and there was no charge of negligence made against the Defendants. RYLANDS personally.
Kulbhushan Jadhavwas sentenced to death by a Pakistani military court on charges of espionage and terrorism in April 2017
Facts- The case starts from the time Mr. N. L Patel was appointed as the Chief Judicial Magistrate. After being…
Indian Partnership Act was earlier part of the Indian Contract itself. It was the eleventh chapter of the Indian Contract…
In dealing with the violation of Art. 21 the Court deemed the arrest and detention as wrongful by citing various cases. These cases are Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration(1978), Sita Ram and Ors. v. State of U.P. (1979).
The Cell submitted its report to the Administrative Committee. Committee initiated disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and during the tenure he was placed under suspension.
The misconduct of the appellant is that he has assaulted or attacked his opponent, Mr Radha Shyam in the courtroom with a knife under section 24(a) of the advocate act 1961 a person
Accordingly, the court has reduced the sentence of six months to a period of one month and enhanced the fine from Rs. 200 to Rs.1000.
In the Supreme Court of India, the respondent’s attorney threw shoes and yelled abuse. He was subject to both contempt and professional misconduct investigations.
The advocate was found guilty as he did take the money from his client for inappropriate reasons and also claimed that the high court registry but the documents had nothing to prove for him.
The respondent filed a review petition holding that there existed a prima facie case of misconduct against the appellant advocate. Thus, the disciplinary committee held him to be guilty of professional misconduct.
The Supreme Court relied on the legal precedents which supported the exemption of leaving the fisherperson out of the war.
The Supreme Court has observed that there has been an increase in unauthorized constructions primarily in urban areas due to the soaring price of real estate.
The slap on the judicial officer’s face is actually a slap on the justice delivery system in the nation. As a result, the issue of accepting an apology or an undertaking, as well as the issue of any mercy with regard to the punishment, cannot and does not exist.