Case Brief: Bar Council of India v. Bonnie Foi Law College
CASE NAME Bar Council of India v. Bonnie Foi Law College CITATION 2017 11 Supreme Court Cases 185 COURT Supreme […]
CASE NAME Bar Council of India v. Bonnie Foi Law College CITATION 2017 11 Supreme Court Cases 185 COURT Supreme […]
CASE NAME Attorney General for India v. Lachma Devi, 1989 Supp (1) SCC 264 CASE NAME (Also known as) Right
CASE NAME Association of Old Settlers of Sikkim v Union of India CITATION WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 59 OF 2013
CASE NAME Ashoka Kumar Thakur vs Union of India and Ors on 10 April 2008 CITATION Writ Petition (civil) 265
CASE NAME Anoop Baranwal Vs Union Of India CITATION (2023) 6 Supreme Court Cases 161 COURT Supreme Court BENCH Justice
CASE NAME Ajit Singh vs State of Punjab & Anr CITATION 1967 AIR 856, 1967 SCR (2) 143 COURT Supreme
The case of Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi & Ors. (1981) 1 SCC 722 is an important case in Indian Constitutional Law that deals specifically with the interpretation of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. In this case, the Supreme Court of India established a ‘six-factor test’ for determining if an entity can be deemed as an agency of the State.
A.K. Gopalan, the government’s political opponent, filed a habeas corpus writ. The legal remedy known as habeas corpus, which means “you may have the body,” gives the court the authority to determine whether a criminal defendant’s incarceration was justified
Tarapore & Co. vs. State of M.P. (1994) is a landmark in Indian case law and, more importantly, one dealing with both the law of contract as well as the law of arbitration. This case, which is a contractor, Tarapore & Co., versus the State of Madhya Pradesh for the construction of Bargi Masonry Dam, shows the way complexities arise when the provisions of the contract run contrary to the legislative plan.
The ruling in “The State of Maharashtra vs Labour Law Practitioners’ Association & Ors”, February 11, 1998, by the applicants of the Supreme Court of India deals with a very relevant subject matter regarding the right of the advocates to appear on behalf of parties in cases before the Industrial Tribunals and Labour Courts established under the “Industrial Disputes Act, 1947