![23:19] Sivaji: 22-3-21 Mahaveer Shivaji MHC advocate PART III FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS CONTINUES: The 2nd half of 19th century and beginning of 20th century marks the organized system of governance partially, provincial assembly was created, Election introduced,voting rights partially given, parliamentary principles of government established, freedom](https://www.sekarreporter.com/wp-content/themes/hueman/assets/front/img/thumb-medium-empty.png)
Follow:
- Next story The Supreme Court Collegium on December 16, 2025 approved the proposal for appointment of two judicial officers as Judges of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. Soon mhc
- Previous story ED admits ‘inadvertent error’ in summoning producer Akash Baskaran despite court stay
Recent Posts
- HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY W.P.(MD)No.11386 of 2026 Tamil Rajendiran @ R.Rajendiran .. Petitioner vs. 1.The Principal Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009. 2.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034. 3.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Madurai. 4.The Joint Commissioner/Executive Officer, Arulmigu Meenakshi Sundareswarar Temple,
- HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI W.P.Crl.(MD)No.2270 of 2026 V.Malar … Petitioner Vs. 1. The Superintendent of Police, O/o/ Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai.
- HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN R.T.(MD).No.02 of 2026 and Crl.A.(MD).No.425 of 2026 R.T.(MD).No.02 of 2026: The State of Tamilnadu rep by, The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Valliyoor,
- In the present case, the scope of Section 41(1) of the Act read with Rule 25 of the Rules is crystal clear and therefore, the scope of exercising discretionary power by the High Court in condoning the delay beyond the period contemplated for preferring any appeal under the Act does not arise at all. 14. In view of the above legal position, the objection raised by the Registry is sustained and the S.T.A.SR.No.81961 of 2019 is rejected at the SR stage. Registry is directed to upload this order in the High Court web site and to report the same under neutral citation. (S.M.S.,J.) (K.S.,J.) 16-04-2026
- Legal Representative Of Deceased Party Can Challenge Arbitral Award U/S.34 Arbitration Act and not under Article 227 of the Constitution/Section 115 of the CPC.” Supreme Court [22/04, 15:26] sekarreporter1: 2026 INSC 393 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No……………………. OF 2026 (@ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 16162/2023) V.K. JOHN … APPELLANT(S) VERSUS S. MUKANCHAND BOTHRA AND HUF (DIED) REPRESENTED BY LRS. & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S) J U D G M E N T SANJAY KAROL,J.
More
Recent Posts
- HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY W.P.(MD)No.11386 of 2026 Tamil Rajendiran @ R.Rajendiran .. Petitioner vs. 1.The Principal Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009. 2.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034. 3.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Madurai. 4.The Joint Commissioner/Executive Officer, Arulmigu Meenakshi Sundareswarar Temple,
- HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI W.P.Crl.(MD)No.2270 of 2026 V.Malar … Petitioner Vs. 1. The Superintendent of Police, O/o/ Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai.
- HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN R.T.(MD).No.02 of 2026 and Crl.A.(MD).No.425 of 2026 R.T.(MD).No.02 of 2026: The State of Tamilnadu rep by, The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Valliyoor,
- In the present case, the scope of Section 41(1) of the Act read with Rule 25 of the Rules is crystal clear and therefore, the scope of exercising discretionary power by the High Court in condoning the delay beyond the period contemplated for preferring any appeal under the Act does not arise at all. 14. In view of the above legal position, the objection raised by the Registry is sustained and the S.T.A.SR.No.81961 of 2019 is rejected at the SR stage. Registry is directed to upload this order in the High Court web site and to report the same under neutral citation. (S.M.S.,J.) (K.S.,J.) 16-04-2026
- Legal Representative Of Deceased Party Can Challenge Arbitral Award U/S.34 Arbitration Act and not under Article 227 of the Constitution/Section 115 of the CPC.” Supreme Court [22/04, 15:26] sekarreporter1: 2026 INSC 393 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No……………………. OF 2026 (@ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 16162/2023) V.K. JOHN … APPELLANT(S) VERSUS S. MUKANCHAND BOTHRA AND HUF (DIED) REPRESENTED BY LRS. & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S) J U D G M E N T SANJAY KAROL,J.