Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Viraj Chetan Shah v Union of India & Anr
The Bombay High Court held that Look Out Circulars issued at the request of public sector banks under executive Office Memoranda violate the fundamental right to travel abroad under Article 21 and are unconstitutional without statutory authority and due process.
Viraj Chetan Shah v Union of India & Anr
The Bombay High Court held that Look Out Circulars issued at the request of public sector banks without statutory authority or due process violate the fundamental right to travel abroad under Article 21 and are unconstitutional.
Viraj Chetan Shah v Union of India & Anr
The Bombay High Court held that Look Out Circulars issued at the request of public sector banks under executive Office Memoranda violate Article 21 and are unconstitutional without statutory authority and procedural safeguards.
Viraj Chetan Shah v Union of India & Anr
The Bombay High Court held that executive instructions allowing public sector banks to request Look Out Circulars restricting overseas travel lack statutory authority and violate fundamental rights under Article 21.
Viraj Chetan Shah v Union of India & Anr
The Bombay High Court held that executive Office Memoranda permitting public sector banks to request Look Out Circulars against defaulters violate Article 21 and lack statutory authority, rendering such LOCs unconstitutional.
Viraj Chetan Shah v Union of India & Anr
The Bombay High Court held that Look Out Circulars issued at the request of public sector banks under executive Office Memoranda lack statutory authority and violate Article 21, thereby quashing such LOCs and affirming the fundamental right to travel abroad.
Viraj Chetan Shah v Union of India & Anr
The Bombay High Court held that Look Out Circulars issued at the request of public sector banks under executive Office Memoranda without statutory authority or procedural safeguards violate the fundamental right to travel abroad under Article 21 and are unconstitutional.
Viraj Chetan Shah v Union of India & Anr
The Bombay High Court held that Look Out Circulars issued at the request of public sector banks without statutory authority and procedural safeguards violate Article 21 and the Passports Act, rendering them unconstitutional.
Viraj Chetan Shah v Union of India & Anr
The Bombay High Court held that Look Out Circulars issued at the request of public sector banks without statutory authority and procedural safeguards violate Article 21 and are unconstitutional.
Viraj Chetan Shah v Union of India & Anr
The Bombay High Court held that executive Office Memoranda empowering public sector banks to request Look Out Circulars without statutory authority violate the fundamental right to travel under Article 21 and are unconstitutional.
Viraj Chetan Shah v Union of India
The Bombay High Court held that executive Office Memoranda empowering public sector banks to request Look Out Circulars against defaulters violate fundamental rights under Article 21 and lack statutory authority, rendering such LOCs unconstitutional.
Viraj Chetan Shah v Union of India
The Bombay High Court held that executive Office Memoranda empowering public sector banks to request Look Out Circulars against alleged defaulters violate Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and are unconstitutional without statutory authority or due process.
Viraj Chetan Shah v Union of India & Anr
The Bombay High Court held that Look Out Circulars issued at the request of public sector banks without statutory authority violate fundamental rights under Article 21 and are unconstitutional.
Ashok Mallinath Halsangi v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court upheld the disqualification of candidates who submitted multiple applications for the same police constable driver post, affirming the clear prohibition in the recruitment advertisement and rejecting attempts to reinterpret its terms.
Bholenath Developers Ltd. v. The State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court held that entitlement to incentive TDR arises only upon actual land surrender, dismissing the petitioners' claim based on their earlier application and ordering under prior regulations.
Pramila Kiran Mane v. Municipal Commissioner-Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation
The Bombay High Court upheld the entitlement of contract employees of Pimpri-Chinchwad Municipal Corporation to salary at minimum pay scale equal to regular employees but denied their claim for permanency, affirming the principle of equal pay for equal work while recognizing the temporary nature of appointments.
wp83262008 f76e1104
The Supreme Court upheld the murder conviction under Section 302 IPC, affirming that reliable evidence and fair trial procedures justify the appellant's conviction and sentence.
Delhi Development Authority v. Batti
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition does not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession has been taken or compensation tendered, overruling the earlier Pune Municipal Corporation decision.
Delhi Development Authority v. Batti
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition does not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession is taken or compensation is paid, overruling the earlier contrary precedent.
Panneer Selvam v. State of Tamil Nadu
The Supreme Court reduced the sentence from 7 to 5 years under Section 304(ii) IPC, affirming conviction but moderating punishment due to absence of premeditation and mitigating factors.