Geek Upd8 - Law Reporter

Latest Post

A Breaking News for Advocates in India, the Centre through a corrigendum, has clarified that all legal services rendered by Advocates are taxable under the new Goods and Services Tax (GST) law under reverse charge basis.

In the notification it has been mentioned that:
Services supplied by an individual advocate including a senior advocate by way of representational services by any court, tribunal or authority, directly or indirectly, to any business entity located in taxable territory, including where contract provision of such service has been entered through another advocate or firm of advocates, by way of legal services , to a business entity.

 GeekUpd8 Doc Id # 707642

BOMBAY HIGH COURT (DB)

Before:- V.M. Kanade and P.D. Kode, JJ.
Public Interest Litigation Nos. 56 and 97 of 2014 and Public Interest Litigation No. 95 of 2013 with Notice of Motion (L) No. 456 of 2014. D/d. 11.8.2014.

Swati Sayaji Patil & Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
State of Maharashtra & Ors. - Respondents

For the Petitioners in C.R.P.I.L. 56 of 2014 :- Satyaprakash Sharma and Nitesh Nevshe i/b Nitesh Nevshe, Advocates.
For the Respondents in C.R.P.I.L. 56 of 2014 :- S.K. Shinde, Public Prosecutor with M.M. Deshmukh, A.P.P.
For the Petitioner in P.I.L. 95 of 2013 and N.M.L. (L) No. 456 of 2014 :- V.K. Raman, Advocate.
For the Petitioner in P.I.L.L. 97 of 2014 :- Appearing in person.
For the Respondent/State in P.I.L. 95 of 2013 and N.M.L.L. 456 of 2014 and P.I.L.L. 97 of 2014 :- Uma Ualsuledesai, A.G.P.

JUDGMENT
P.D. Kode, J. - PIL Nos. 95/2013, 97/2014 and Notice of Motion (L) No. 456 of 2014 are not on board. Upon mentioning, they are taken on board and are heard and disposed of with Criminal PIL No. 56 of 2014.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing in two PILs and the Petitioner appearing in person in one PIL. By these petitions, Petitioners are seeking an appropriate writ, order and direction, directing the Respondent - State of Maharashtra to prevent children below the age of 18 years from taking part in performances which are popularly known as "Dahi Handi",

 GeekUpd8 Doc Id # 707641

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Before :- Rajiv Narain Raina, J.
CWP No.1997 of 2016 (O&M). D/d. 24.02.2016.

Sunil Sukhija - Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab & others - Respondents

For the Petitioner :- Narinder Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondent-State :- Inqulab Nagpal, AAG, Punjab.
For the Respondent Nos. 2 & 4 :- Anupam Singla, Advocate.

JUDGMENT
Rajiv Narain Raina, J. (Oral) - Having regard to the status and character of the respondent - Meritorious School governed by a Memorandum of Association and the school being registered as a charitable society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, created by Government for imparting quality education and rendering assistance to the poor and meritorious students in Punjab and having regard to the fact that the State exercises deep and pervasive control over the functioning of the Society known as the "Society for the Promotion of Quality Education for Poor and Meritorious Students of Punjab" headed by the Chief Minister, Punjab with high powered Members including the Chief Secretary and Principal Secretaries of various Departments, the petitioner enjoys a special status as a mother even though she is in contractual employment, the contract expiring in the year 2018.


If you listen to Donald Trump on the campaign trail, many Mexicans that try to enter the United States are rapists. So it would seem that the current US administration is not very tolerant of people that have criminal records crossing the border.

Where does that leave Canadians that are interested in visiting the US for shopping and for entertainment or vacation? Well, if you have a criminal record, it can mean that you will be denied entry to the United States at the border.

Allahabad High Court Judgments
 GeekUpd8 Doc Id # 707639

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Before:- Amar Singh Chauhan, J.
Criminal Revision No. 3550 of 2010. D/d. 22.11.2016.

Smt. Surbhi Agrawal @ Sunita - Revisionist
Versus
State of U.P. and Anr. - Opposite Parties

For the Revisionist :- R.K. Vaish, Advocate.
For the Opposite Parties :- V. Kumar, Govt. Advocate.

JUDGMENT
Amar Singh Chauhan, J. - This criminal revision has been preferred against the judgement and order dated 13.7.2010, passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bareilly in Criminal Case No. 482 of 2005 (Smt. Surbhi Agrawal v. Punit Agrawal), under section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Baradari, District Bareilly whereby the application of the revisionist-applicant Surbhi Agrawal moved under section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance, was rejected.

Puneet Batish Advocate

{facebook#http://g8.geekupd8.com/Adv.Batish} {twitter#http://g8.geekupd8.com/Twitter} {google-plus#http://g8.geekupd8.com/+pb} {pinterest#http://g8.geekupd8.com/Pinterest} {youtube#http://g8.geekupd8.com/YouTube}

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Powered by Blogger.
Javascript DisablePlease Enable Javascript To See All Widget