Search Results for "non-obstante clause"

56 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 56 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Anticipatory Bail to Mother-in-Law in Triple Talaq Case — Section 7(c) of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 Does Not Bar Anticipatory Bail Under Section 438 CrPC. Offence Under the Act Can Only Be Committed by Muslim Husband, Not Mother-in-Law.

The appeal arose from a judgment of the Kerala High Court rejecting an anticipatory bail application filed by the appellant, the mother-in-law of the ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeal of Muslim Divorced Woman in Maintenance Case — Family Court Has Jurisdiction Under Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. High Court erred in holding that Family Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain application under Section 3 of the Act.

The appeal arose from a judgment of the Rajasthan High Court which set aside an order of the Family Court granting maintenance to a Muslim divorced wo...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Employer's Appeal in Gratuity Dispute — Trust Deed and Scheme Capped Gratuity at Statutory Limit Under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. Employer's Gratuity Scheme Did Not Abandon Statutory Ceiling; Employee Entitled Only to Statutory Maximum.

The appeal arose from a dispute between BCH Electric Limited (appellant-employer) and Pradeep Mehra (respondent-employee) regarding the quantum of gra...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeal of Taxpayer Against Non-Processing of Income Tax Returns and Refund Claims. Mandamus Issued to Process Returns Under Section 143(1) Within Four Weeks, Subject to Section 143(1D) and Section 241A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

The appellant, Vodafone Idea Ltd. (formerly Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd), is a telecommunications company that filed income tax returns for Assessmen...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Division Bench Judgment on Interpretation of Section 24 Proviso in Land Acquisition Act. The proviso to Section 24 of the 2013 Act governs Section 24(2), not Section 24(1)(b), as held in Delhi Metro Rail Corporation v. Tarun Pal Singh.

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals challenging the Division Bench judgment in Delhi Metro Rail Corporation v. Tarun Pal Singh, which held that th...