Criminal Procedure and keeping in view the
principles stated by the majority in Radheshyam Kejriwal (supra)
but has allowed itself to decide on the justifiability ... should have followed the view expressed
by the majority and not the minority. The approach is absolutely
erroneous. Be that
Vikas Yadav vs State Of U.P And Ors. Etc. Etc on 3 October, 2016
absolute lack of evidence. Neither can the
contention of parity, allegedly decided on
28.11.2001, be upheld nor can the contention of
the majority being validly ... there being absolutely no
explanation or evidence as to how a
shareholder, having substantial interest in the
company, transferred majority shares to the
Managing Director
Modern Dental College vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 May, 2016
Author: A.K
Verhoeven, Marie-Emmanuelle vs Union Of India . on 28 April, 2016
Author: Madan B. Lokur
Narasimha Rao v. State (CBI )-(1998) 4 SCC 626 (5Judges) Majority;
paras 109 and 113: citing Tej Kiran Jain case at para 113;
( c) Kuldip ... Article
105) “makes it plain that the freedom (of speech) is
literally absolute and unfettered”.
9. Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, learned Attorney General in his written
Lord Atkinson
said in Matthey v. Curling5 “a person who expressly contracts
absolutely to do a thing not naturally impossible is not excused ... King's enemies … or vis major”. This being the legal
position, a contention in the extreme form that the doctrine of
frustration as recognised
opined that the imposition of
dismissal as a punishment, which is a major one, could not have been
imposed by the disciplinary authority. The said ... Judge. Thrust of reasoning of the first appellate
court was that a major punishment of dismissal could be imposed in
law. It is quite unfortunate
recommend a piece
of work. The district authority is entrusted with the absolute authority to decide upon the
feasibility of the work recommended, assess ... providing
audit and utilization certificates. The Constitution Bench observed that a major role is
9
assigned under MPLADS to panchayats, municipalities and corporations. Rejecting
been entered into by a company in which the
respondent holds major holding. Question as to
whether on the basis of such contract, the
respondent ... High Court should not have ordinarily recorded an absolutely
contrary conclusion, while disposing of the application under Order
VI Rule 16. And in case
