Judgments
EX CONST BAJRANG LAL VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
INNOVISION LIMITED VERSUS NAYATI HEALTHCARE RESEARCH PVT. LTD.
JAIVEER SINGH VERSUS SUNITA CHAUDHARY
MRS. SHASHI VERSUS STATE NCT OF DELHI
PREETI JAIN VERSUS STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)
RAJENDER KUMAR VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS
RAM SURAT SINGH VERSUS DIRECTOR GENERAL CISF & ANR
RAMPYARI KHINCH VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS
SHALU MAAN VERSUS DEAN FACULTY OF LAW UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ANR.
TATA CAPITAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. VERSUS RUCHIKA AUTOLINKS PRIVATE LTD.
V K MALHOTRA VERSUS UNION BANK OF INDIA AND ORS
D.K. Mishra vs. Hon'ble High Court of M.P. and another
Law laid down - (i) Under Rule 42 of the M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976, a Government servant who had elected for voluntary retirement can withdraw his election subsequently with the specific approval of the authority and no absolute right exists in favour of such Government servant but the discretion given to the authority under Rule 42(2) is to be exercised “ön consideration of the circumstances of the case” and on the objective application of mind. Hence, the authority can Full Judgment
Madan Mohan Shrivastava vs. Additional District Magistrate (South) Bhopal and others
Law laid down - (i) Section 13(4) of the Securitisation Act permits the secured creditor to take recourse to the measures prescribed therein to recover the secured debt. One such measure is to take possession of the secured asset. Section 14 of the Act gives remedy to the secured creditor to obtain possession of the secured asset by approaching the District Magistrate. Hence, the action of the District Magistrate under Section 14 is in furtherance of the provision contained under Section Full Judgment
Rachna Mahawar vs. The District Magistrate and others
Law laid down - The power under Section 14 of the Securitisation Act can be exercised by the Additional District Magistrate also. The nature of power exercisable under Section 14 of the Act is to facilitate taking over of possession of secured assets and not to decide any contentious issue. Section 37 of the Act specifically provides that application of any other law for the time being in force is not barred. Section 20 of the Cr.P.C. reflects that the Additional Full Judgment
Pratha Rajak vs. Dr. Harisingh Gour Vishwavidyalaya & others
Law laid down - If a candidate takes a calculated chance and appears in the selection process then being unsuccessful, he cannot challenge the process. After participating in selection process without any objection and when the process is over, a candidate is estopped from challenging the brochure condition and condition of admission relating to sports quota. Full Judgment